The Onion: Election Results Leaked
by Macauley on February 28th, 2008
Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early
Archive for February, 2008
Lawrence Lessig is 4Barack
by Macauley on February 13th, 2008
From Lessig.org (short biography):
Lawrence Lessig is a Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and founder of the school’s Center for Internet and Society…Professor Lessig is the author of Free Culture (2004), The Future of Ideas (2001) and Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace (1999). He chairs the Creative Commons project, and serves on the board of the Free Software Foundation, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Public Library of Science, and Public Knowledge. He is also a columnist for Wired.
“20 minutes or so on why I am 4Barack”
Lessig clearly articulates a strong basis for Democrats to make a choice. Speaking of which, check out a piece in The Nation that’s also worth a read by a high school classmate, Chris Hayes: “The Choice.” (Jan 31)
And from Robin Morgan co-founder of the Women’s Media Center, Goodbye To All That, a pro-Hillary “argument.”
Morgan uses an impressive rhetorical device: She laments the ingrained sexism in American society, while sprinkling in anti-Obama riffs in a way that make it seem like a vote for Obama will propagate or prolong that sexism.
Goodbye to a campaign where he has to pass as white (which whites—especially wealthy ones—adore), while she has to pass as male (which both men and women demanded of her, and then found unforgivable). If she were black or he were female we wouldn’t be having such problems, and I for one would be in heaven. But at present such a candidate wouldn’t stand a chance—even if she shared Condi Rice’s Bush-defending politics.
Now most people of good conscience recognize that viewing a candidate solely in light of race, gender, or any other superficial or incidental characteristic is idiotic, as is the double-standard to which Hillary may be subjected — forced to, then criticized for trying to “pass as male.” But this is a problem with the culture and mass media coverage, not an argument for who should be President.
Similarly, when Morgan decries the fact that “when a sexist idiot screamed ‘Iron my shirt!’ at HRC, it was considered amusing,” while noting that, “if a racist idiot shouted ‘Shine my shoes!’ at BO, it would‚Äôve inspired hours of airtime and pages of newsprint analyzing our national dishonor,” she’s right, but again, it’s not an argument, unless she thinks that electing Obama will cause more sexist idiots, or that not electing Clinton will prevent the reduction of the same.
Maybe electing a female president will reduce sexism — a worthy goal — and maybe it won’t, and if that is your sole or primary voting issue, then perhaps that should guide your vote. But there are a lot of other issues, and here’s where Morgan is a bit disingenuous.
Goodbye to a misrepresented generational divide . . .
…Goodbye to some young women eager to win male approval by showing they‚Äôre not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten thestatus quo), who can‚Äôt identify with a woman candidate because she is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power, who fear their boyfriends might look at them funny if they say something good about her.
That sounds pretty patronizing, but moreover the generational divide isn’t (by and large) being misrepresented. It’s quite real.
And goodbye to the ageism . . .
How dare anyone unilaterally decide when to turn the page on history, papering over real inequities and suffering constituencies in the promise of a feel-good campaign? How dare anyone claim to unify while dividing, or think that to rouse U.S. youth from torpor it’s useful to triage the single largest demographic in this country’s history: the boomer generation—the majority of which is female?
It’s not ageism simply to favor a younger candidate. I’m not supporting Obama because he’s 46, and I don’t know anyone who is. Calling his, “a feel-good campaign,” is a cheap shot that ignores the real differences between the candidates. Is Obama dividing people he claims to unify? That’s a particularly bizarre perspective. And of course the “majority” of many demographics is female. Is the fact that women live longer than men relevant to the election?
Encouraging an underrepresented voting class, with large interests in the future of the U.S., to make their voices heard is unquestionably good. It’s hard for me, a Gen Xer, to be sympathetic to a Baby Boomer feeling left out of the political discussion! Boomers, I would argue, have wielded too much political influence, despite being the largest demographic.
They haven’t (so far) gotten their collective acts together to fix Social Security, and theirs will likely be the last generation to have it. In my lifetime there have been more than twice as many years with right-wing, economically regressive, militaristic Republican presidents, as there have been with a Democratic one. (Not that Ms. Morgan was voting for Reagan, but somebody from her generation was — and Reagan won the women’s vote as well.) For the “generation of radicals,” to downplay, or even demonize a youth movement is ironic at best.
Morgan (left) goes on to offer inspirational quotes from Hillary from 1995 and 1969 (not a typo), presumably because we ought to be able to trust what she said before she was directly involved in politics. That’s fine, but it doesn’t make up for her clear shifting with the political winds in subsequent decades.
“I support her because her progressive politics are as strong as her proven ability to withstand what will be a massive right-wing assault in the general election,” writes Morgan. That Hillary would withstand a massive right-wing assault is a supposition, but proven progressive politics? That’s just false. Relative to what? Kucinich was the most progressive of the initial Dems, while Clinton was, is, and would be as president, among the least.
It’s true that, policy-wise, Obama and Clinton are quite close together, which is why I take Lessig’s points about judgment, leadership, and foreign policy so seriously.
-MP
***
[As an aside, while I'm not particularly fond of Southpark, Robin Morgan clearly hasn't watched more than a few minutes of the show.
If it were about Jews, we would recognize it instantly as anti-Semitic propaganda; if about race, as KKK poison. Hell, PETA would go ballistic if such vomitous spew were directed at animals. Where is our sense of outrage—as citizens, voters, Americans?
As anyone who has seen an episode or two knows, Southpark is viciously and mercilessly offensive to any and all groups, including animals. That's basically been the concept since its inception. So in this case the righteous indignation is amusingly misplaced.]
The Best of ICC’s Corus 2008
by Macauley on February 8th, 2008
Corus, the first event of the first year of the new Chess Grand Slam, and my first chess journalism gig as an employee of the Internet Chess Club (ICC). I’ve signed on for a year packed with super-tournaments and matches which I will be covering in various media.
The video coverage for Corus 2008 was meant to make chess exciting, give viewers a chance to see the tournament and the players from a front row seat and behind the scenes.
All thirteen days, plus a few bonus videos are available free from ICC’s Chess.FM. Below are my four favorites:
Day 6 – Fischer Remembered:
More than just an ordinary ICC video, this piece turned into a 13 minute mini-documentary on the day of Bobby Fischer’s death. I was at the right place at the right time with many of the world’s top grandmasters, past and present, learning the news and commenting on Fischer’s legacy.
ICC has made the video available for cross-posting, under a Creative Commons license. For non-commercial distribution only, you can select your web site format and copy & paste the relevant code to embed the video on your site. It’s received over 10,000 views to date. I’d love to see it subtitled in various languages. Contact me if you’re interested.
Day 11 – Anand Climbing:
This was my first use of a split screen virtual demo board with video, which I also employed in Day 12 – Magnus Smiling and Irina Live From Corus for Chess Life Online. I also composed the music from scratch using loops in Apple Soundtrack. I call it Nordic Funk.
Day 4 – Topalov Upset:
Nice shots, smooth edits, and GM voiceover. ‘Nuff said.
Day 9 – Handshake?
The biggest non-chess story of the tournament was the no-handshake forfeiture of Ivan Cheparinov (Topalov’s second) in the B-group in round 8. (ChessVibes has the most thorough & succinct re-cap.) Many of the professionals guessed that this was a trial balloon for the Topalov-Kramnik game in round 9. So the question became, would there be a handshake or not? If so, who would offer it?
I got the front-row shot, and voiceover from Cheparinov and Anatoly Karpov, a bonus. Also, the best closing line of the tournament:
Topalov: I just follow the rules.
Next up: Morelia/Linares, February 14th – March 8th.