I usually put a lot of effort into voting. There are 30+ seats on the ballot here. I was planning on spending a few hours this weekend looking at all of the candidates for each seat and writing down my choices... I think there is a very very small percentage of the population who actually do this.

I have to say, I'm so fucking sick of the bullshit that is streaming out of the right wing spin machine that I'm thinking of showing up and voting a straight democratic ticket. I know its not really smart. But I've had it.

I want the level of the debate raised.

BUSH: The Democrats just follow a simple philosophy.

Just say no.

When it comes to listening to the terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer?

It's just say no.

When it comes to detaining terrorists, what is the Democrats' answer?

Just say no.

When it comes to questioning terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer?

AUDIENCE: Just say no.

BUSH: When it comes to trying the terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer?

AUDIENCE: Just say no.

BUSH: So when the Democrats ask your for vote, what's your answer?

AUDIENCE: No!

Mr. Bush's own lawyers argued "just say no" on the matter of trying terrorists, preferring instead hold them forever without trial:

There is no obligation under the laws and customs of war for the military to charge captured combatants with any offense and, indeed, the vast majority of combatants seized during war are detained as a simple war measure without charges. Similarly, there is no general right to counsel under the laws and customs of war
for those who are detained as enemy combatants.

John Kerry has been getting tarred and featherd for 24 hours because of a misinterpretation of something he said. He didn't mean it, but half the country is mad as hell about it anyway.

As someone who cares about the system of checks and balances, civil liberties, and the rule of law, I agree with Democrats who've argued that the President should follow FISA. I don't think the President should be able to apprehend someone in an airport in Chicago and call it a "battlefield detention." I don't think the President should be able to detain people, citizens in particular, indefinately, without charges. I think these things strike at the very heart of the fundamental underpinnings of our system of government and I am mad as hell about it.

Am I misinterpreting the above remarks when I conclude that the President thinks I'm opposed to combating terrorism because of my concerns? No. I'm not. He means it.

Why is it OK to tar and feather one man for something he didn't say, but no one would raise a finger to question another man for something he did say. THIS is offensive! Why isn't anyone, anywhere, expressing any anger about this?

Media Matters - Media uncritically reported Bush's false claim

Researchers funded by The Terry Fox Foundation and the Canadian Cancer Society have found that a cancer-fighting virus called VSV kills the most malignant form of brain cancer in mice.

Are anti-cancer virii back from the dead?

Fight Aging!: Stomping On Cancer With Viruses

Have you ever had an argument with someone because they misinterpreted something you said about them. You tell a joke, and they read it the wrong way and get hurt. I'm sure this has happened to everyone. Its human.

Usually, if the person is reasonable, and you explain to them that they misinterpreted you and that you didn't mean what they thought you meant, you can work things out, and everything will be OK.

Sometimes, however, those people will insist that you did mean things the way that they chose to interpret them. They will refuse to accept your clarification and they will continue to be hurt. This sort of behavior is often associated with clinical depression. People who want to feel hurt will insist on an interpretation of events that allows them to feel that way, even if that interpretation isn't rational. Sometimes this is simply a matter of maturity.

I live in Atlanta. I listen to right wing talk radio. I don't really like right wing talk radio. I wish that I could turn on the radio while driving home from work and listen to a sane person tell me the news. I don't have that choice. Its either bad pop music, art music that I'm usually not in the mood for after work, sports, or right wing talk radio. There used to be a left wing talk radio station, but they were just as bad as the right wing talk radio stations, and they don't seem to be on the air anymore. I really ought to start downloading podcasts onto my ipod, but I've been too lazy.

I almost never agree with anything I hear on talk radio, be it right or left. Talk radio usually consists of angry people making bad arguments for bad ideas, and often they are downright hateful to boot.

Today's installment of right wing talk radio consisted of a riot over the following statement made by John Kerry:

“You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

It seems obvious to me that this is a snipe at the Bush Administration's Iraq Policy. Kerry is calling the administration's Iraq policy stupid. I think its funny. I actually laughed out loud when I heard the soundbite, in particular because it was framed on right wing talk radio by so much vitrol.

Of course, the right wing has misinterpreted this statement to imply that service in the armed forces is what happens to people who don't go to school. This hurts their feelings.

Its obvious that Kerry did not mean that. Kerry served in Vietnam. I'm sure that as a Senator Kerry knows many well educated career military people. The idea that he would want to offend the service of hundreds of thousands of people in the military is nonsentical.

But, thats what the right wing thinks. And their feelings are hurt.

So, Kerry clarifies:

If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes se... [ Read More (0.3k in body) ]

The Republican Party is mentally ill. Yes, I mean it.

Increasingly, many products are being designed with features that intentionally restrict the way the user can behave, or enforce certain modes of behaviour. The same intentions are also evident in the design of many systems and environments.

This is a cool idea for a blog.

A good example post is here. This ought to be in Rattle's bookmark list for the next time someone is offended by his suggestions that the UK can be viewed as a model for just how bad surveillance can get in a "free" society.

We have reached that stage now where we have gone almost as far as it is possible to go in establishing the infrastructures of control and surveillance within an open and free environment... People are resigned to their fate. They’ve bought the Government’s arguments for the public good. There is a generational failure of memory about individual rights. Whenever Government says that some intrusion is necessary in the public interest, an entire generation has no clue how to respond, not even intuitively.

The article quoted here provides some clear examples of abuse of anti-terrorism powers in the UK and a chilling quote from Tony Blair about rebalancing the priorities of criminal trials in favor of prosecutors. If an American politician ever utters such a thing I'll be first in line to volunteer on behalf of his or her opponent. The British people need another bill of rights.

Architectures of Control in Design

Following up on this post from earlier this year ...

Seagate Technology LLC hopes its new security system for the hard drive will become the most formidable barrier between computer data and thieves.

The world's largest hard drive maker says its DriveTrust Technology, to be announced Monday, automatically encrypts every bit of data stored on the hard drive and requires users to have a key, or password, before being able to access the disk drive.

... and on this IBM press release from last month, about their encrypting tape drive.

Seagate to encrypt data on hard drives

A German ballet school for girls is the setting for mysterious deaths, in this 1977 horror story, written and directed by Dario Argento. "Suspiria" is a visually stunning film. The images contain objects we recognize, like people, buildings, and interior decor. But the objects seem vaguely menacing, and less real than surreal, as though they symbolize ideas, repressed desires, or subconscious fears. The vivid, rich colors, strange camera angles, deep shadows, and bright light piercing through darkness, all contribute to the impression that the viewer is trapped in someone else's nightmare.

If you are looking for a trippy halloween flick you could do worse then Suspiria. Sampled by Ministry! What more could you ask for?

For something a bit more surreal I might also offer that you check out the works of Jan Svankmajer. Teaser here.

Suspiria (1977)

One of the more corrupt pundit phenomena is the way in which the most loyal and worshipful Bush followers, who spent the last five years praising the President and doing everything possible to enable his most radical policies, are now suddenly pretending to be so deeply dissatisfied with his rule. Now that the Bush movement is collapsing, they all want to pretend that they knew all along that things weren't going well and that the President was deeply flawed.

There is not one damn thing that is new about Iraq. Nothing about 2003 has changed recently. If you are now unhappy about what we did in 2003 you should have been unhappy about it 2 years ago. In fact, if you'd bothered to be unhappy about it two years ago you could have actually fired the people responsible for it instead of punishing a bunch of other people who had much less to do with it, but happen to have the misfortune of playing for the same team.

Occam's razor suggests that the people of this country just aren't down with the Republicans in the wake of Katrina, and the conservative pundit class is trying to save itself while diverting attention from that issue. I hope thats the answer.

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Peggy Noonan and the rotting pundit class

Citing improvements to the law, the American Civil Liberties Union
today withdrew a three-year-old lawsuit over Section 215 of the Patriot Act, but
said it is prepared to defend individuals who receive demands for information
under the provision.

Some good patriot act news.

American Civil Liberties Union : Citing Improvements to Law, ACLU Withdraws Section 215 Case But Vows to Fight Individual Orders

Oh, those Tennesseans!

“Canada can take care of North Korea,” a grandfatherly farmer says. “They’re not busy.” And a sleazy looking fellow scoffs: “So he took money from porn movie producers. Who hasn’t?”

Why are we making electoral decisions based on this sort of tripe? This isn't democracy. This is the cola wars. If we're really interesting in undermining the influence of campaign finance dollars we have to give the people better information resources than ads like these.

Scary, Like Funny Scary