From Josh Marshall:

There’s a tendency, even among too many people of good faith and good politics, to shy away from asserting and admitting this simple fact because Wilson has either gone on too many TV shows or preened too much in some photo shoot. But that is disreputable and shameful. The entire record of this story has been under a systematic, unfettered and, sadly, largely unresisted attack from the right for four years. Key facts have been buried under an avalanche of misinformation. The then-chairman of the senate intelligence committee made his committee an appendage of the White House and himself the president’s bawd and issued a report built on intentional falsehood and misdirection.

No one is perfect. The key dividing line is who’s telling the truth and who’s lying. Wilson is on the former side, his critics the latter. Everything else is triviality.

From day one this story has been about official lies — corrupt power buttressed by fraud. Along the way it became a story about the president’s hireling commentators who lost their honor by becoming part of the fraud. What Wilson said was true. His attackers are all parties to the same lie. Don’t forget that.

I just caught this post at Spazeboy who links to NBBlogs re accreditation at New Britain High School.

As far as I know, NB is not even on probation. I can’t find a source at NBBlogs. A few more attributions and description of how information is being gathered would be helpful. NEASC responds to public disclosure requests.

I need to get out of the prediction game and go back to studying medieval literature and recursion and fractals in AS3.

I predicted Gore in 2000 (still think I was correct).

A no go in Iraq.

Kerry in 2004.

And that Bush wouldn’t touch the Scooter Libby affair. Why this and why now?

At least the Mandelbrot set behaves according to rules of logic. TPMMuckraker links to one reason why arbitrary action and decision-making is a dumb idea. Bizarro world keeps branching out. What’s happening on the other forks?

Part b of the holding from the Morse case follows, tracked down from ScotusBlog:

(b) The Court agrees with Morse that those who viewed the banner would interpret it as advocating or promoting illegal drug use, in violation of school policy. At least two interpretations of the banner’s
words–that they constitute an imperative encouraging viewers to smoke marijuana or, alternatively, that they celebrate drug use–demonstrate that the sign promoted such use. This pro-drug interpretation gains further plausibility from the paucity of alternative meanings the banner might bear. Pp. 6–8.

I don’t really understand the court’s reasoning here or in its other parts. The Court agrees with Morse’s interpretation of how others might view or determine the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus,” all of which must be guessed at. The dissent reads as if this has all been a simple waste of time, and I agree.

All this could’ve been laughed off by the school and the students. Rather, we have what I would suggest is a sweeping gesture by the court about a “very serious” matter. BH4J is now advocacy for drug use. Now any kid can wear the statement on a shirt and call it political speech. Right?

So, I’m back in town, ran to class upon fly-in, and had a great time talking freedom, obligation, war, and Tim O’Brien.

Lots to talk about.

Well, it’s morning in Milwaukee, and waiting for the big party to begin.

It’s wonderful to have the computer, the ipod, and the phone at my finger tips so that I can relay all news to my loves in CT and get the news back from them. Cept we couldn’t get videochat to work.

I’ll have more on some spatial observations: Milwaukee vs. Hartford is a dramatic difference.

More soon.

Spazeboy and Caffeinated Geek Girl on Colin McEnroe.

[display_podcast]

Bob Kerry is making a fool of himself at the moment on Biill Moyers’ Journal. Worse, he seems out of touch with logical determinations of reality. That al Qaeda would be recruiting actively despite our involvement in Iraq is false justification for the inspiration now. Secondly, thinking the Iraq action a major blunder does not mean that one supports dictators (a fallacy of the false middle).

“What are we supposed to do, let dictators like that stay in place?” he asks. Please.
“What are we supposed to do, encourage middle class debt, dishealth, and shirk on present and future generations?”

The trillion spent and so many losses later, for what then?

The argument about whether to “stay the course” or “withdraw” is a simplistic dichotomy. “Course” is undefinable and “withdraw” does not describe the reality of the situation: withdraw from what? In my view, course, given the Iraq context, means perpetual: a “war on terror,” much like a war on stupidity, cannot end. In the case of withdrawal, we have a dark and troubling comedy. In the case of a gigantic misstep, it’s a little odd to destroy and then say “Oops, see ya” in the place of the “administration” who committed the destruction in the first place and who will not be the one to say “oops” at all. Solve the problem: perhaps a competent government could figure it out.

The real battle is for the heart of government in this country, a battle the democrats have already lost, as far as I’m concerned.