The issues surrounding Israel’s recent attacks in Gaza are swirling and complex, and I don’t know if anyone can even say the words “Israel” and “Gaza” in the same sentence these days without inspiring spittle-flecked invective from both sides of the perceptual chasm.

My own view is that both sides hate each other more than they love their own children, and that this will continue until that’s no longer the case. I’m also not happy that my money’s purchasing weapons that will ultimately keep the fire burning bright and hot. I also realize that, as an American, despite the fact that I was as opposed to the strategy and tactics of the GWOT as anyone could be, I have zero moral authority or credibility when it comes to counseling other nations to resist the temptation to lash out with violent, irrational military responses to attacks by a handful of extremists.

I also despise the language people use to talk about military action. The terms “fighting”, “kick ass”, “defend (one’s) self”, and even “strength” are terms appropriately used when discussing a bar brawl, where two violent actors punch and kick each other until one or both have had enough. They have no place in honest conversations and arguments in which children are blown up or immolated by modern weapons of war, and I find the practice (especially by Americans) disgusting.

One thing that I do know, though, is that Max Blumenthal is a fucking bad-ass.

(h/t Dennis Perrin)

Olberman’s gonna need a few hundred billion to get outta the hole when this thing’s all over…

Dennis Perrin is watching the Democratic Convention, and makes a valid point in the midst of all the Blue Lovin’.

I’m happy that Michelle Obama found success in her life and loves her family, but why the fuck should I care? Her husband presumes to exert state control over me and mine, spending my tax dollars for expanded war in Afghanistan, continuing misery for the Palestinians, narco-war and repression in Colombia, among other wonderful projects, and I’m supposed to melt because his wife can read hackneyed, Hallmark copy from a teleprompter?

This is pretty cool.

I love the pedal-powered farm equipment. Story in the WaPo here, website here.

(h/t TheWashCycle)

John McCain, presidential candidate, was hoping that his wife would enter a biker beauty contest! Like this one!

Toby Keith just called Barak Obama an Oreo!

Paris Hilton responded to attacks by John McCain by proposing a reasonably coherent, bipartisan compromise on energy policy!

Yeeeeeeeeeeehaw!!! Note to whomever put the acid in my thermos this morning: that is some first class shit! Thank you! I am tripping balls!

Heh.

…the next morning, Nagourney awoke to an e-mail from Talking Points Memo writer Greg Sargent asking him to comment on an eight-point rebuttal trashing his piece that the Obama campaign had released to reporters and bloggers like The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder and Politico’s Ben Smith. Nagourney had not heard the complaints from the Obama camp and had no idea they were so steamed. “I’m looking at this thing, and I’m like, ‘What the hell is this?’ ” Nagourney recently recalled. “I really flipped out.”

Later that afternoon, Nagourney got permission from Times editors to e-mail Sargent a response to the Obama memo. But the episode still grates. “I’ve never had an experience like this, with this campaign or others,” Nagourney tells me. “I thought they crossed the line. If you have a problem with a story I write, call me first. I’m a big boy. I can handle it. But they never called. They attacked me like I’m a political opponent.”

No! That’s so unfair! Why would they treat you like an opponent?

Last year, when Hillary Clinton campaigned as a front-runner, Obama provided access to the press corps and won over the media. One night, during a campaign stop in Iowa, he met reporters for off-the-record drinks. He cooperated for magazine profiles and appeared on the cover of GQ. And Clinton’s relationship with the press wasn’t half as easy. “The difference is the Clinton people were hostile for no reason,” a reporter who has covered both Democrats tells me.

I can think of a reason! My hand’s raised! Pick me! Pick me!

It’s because you, the press corps, spent 8 years savaging the Clintons by playing stenographer to the ratfuckingest Republicans to come along since Nixon, continued to do so during Hillary Clinton’s senate career, and then outdid yourselves during her run at the Democratic nomination! You said things like:

…the reason she’s a US Senator, the reason she’s a candidate for President, the reason she may be a front runner, is that her husband messed around.

And:

I have often said, when she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs

And let’s not forget:

But doesn’t it seem like Chelsea’s sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?

Those are just a few gems off the top of a 16-year stack of vicious, bullshit coverage. Look, I wasn’t a Clinton supporter in the primaries per se, in fact for much of the primaries I was prohibited from publicly expressing a preference. I thought she’d be a right fine candidate, I thought the same thing about Obama. But there’s really no denying that going all the way back to 1992, there’s been plenty of reasons for the Clintons to treat you assholes like… assholes. It amazes me constantly, given the celebrity-journalism quality of political and campaign coverage, that they’re able to treat you as well as they do.

So, given the fact that this ain’t Obama’s first rodeo, and that he’s evidently really, really good at this, he’s going to work you fuckers to his advantage, and work to keep you from fucking him the way you’ve been fucking Democrats since Gingrich, Delay and Rove have had their hands up your puppet asses. It’s not new, LBJ was a master at this, and it’s not personal, any more than it is when you play video clips of Rev. Wright saying, “God Damn America!” several thousand times in a couple of weeks.

Hope this clears things up, and you’re welcome!

(h/t Atrios)

Eric Alterman says, about The Dark Knight:

I saw The Dark Knight yesterday afternoon, and I think it pulled off the neat trick of being both libertarian and fascistic, which is to say it is damn confused

Atrios, “trying to get a handle on the odd politics”, thinks that nails it. His commenters then proceed to burn it, and then Frank Miller, to the ground. (And here I thought that this was just a game for the right-wing fringe of Blawgworld.)

I’m no fan of Frank Miller’s political views, any more than I am of, say, Mark Helprin’s. But Helprin’s politics don’t change my opinion that he’s an amazing writer, or reduce my capacity to be amazed and delighted by A Winter’s Tale, or Soldier of the Great War. Likewise, Miller’s political views, misguided as I believe them to be, don’t undo his achievements as an artist and story teller (or change the fact that he wasn’t involved in making the film).

Of all the things The Dark Knight had me mulling over, none of them were anywhere close to “gosh, I’m confused by the politics of this movie… is it Libertarian or Fascist? How confusing and inconsistent.” Batman’s roots are in detective novels, and The Dark Knight is about the dance that Batman and The Joker have been doing since the 50’s. I came away from it thinking it was a superb manifestation of that story, an impressive work of film making, and a truly stunning performance by Heath Ledger. Pondering the film’s political ideology would have diminished the experience.

I understand that when politics and media are your life, as an academic, or a pundit, it’s natural to look at everything through those lenses. And I care about politics, no question. But it seems to me like going down this path with everything is a surefire way to suck all the life and joy out of art, be it fine or pop. Why do that?

[UPDATE]: Ezra points to what’s probably the best post on the politics of Nolan’s Batman I’ve read yet, in that reading it didn’t leave me with a clenched jaw wondering why-oh-why people have to do this to comic book movies.

Ya know what? I don’t think that getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down in and of itself qualifies anyone to be president either. I’m of the opinion that one’s shoddy service in the Air National Guard, barely limping through one’s tour, possibly going AWOL, drinking and snorting your way through to the end while your cohort fights and dies halfway around the world is a far superior benchmark of judgment and true grit. Haven’t we learned anything from the last 7 years?

Also, a little note to the media: up yours. Take your collective faces out of McCain’s taint long enough to do your fucking jobs. With a press corp like this, it’s amazing that we’re not already irrigating our fields with Gatorade.

[Update]: An astute commenter takes Joe Klein to task for his tut-tutting at Time’s Swampland, and notes:

Republican Congressman Duke Cunningham was a vastly superior fighter pilot in Vietnam than John McCain becoming the first Ace of the war.

Where is Duke Cunningham right now? Sitting in prison for taking bribes as a congressman.

George H. W. Bush was trained as a pilot, was shot down and then had a largely ineffective presidency.

George W. Bush was trained as a jet fighter pilot and he’s the consensus choice for the most incompetent president in American history.

Seems to me that being a fighter pilot ain’t such a great thing to put on your resume these days, eh? Perhaps some intrepid reporter will note these facts. Yeah, no I don’t think so either.

[Update Again]: Wes Clark isn’t going to back off, renounce, denounce, or reject a got-damn thing. Broadcast punditude, go ahead and invite him on your show to talk about it, but don’t be surprised if you get more than you bargained for. He’s whip smart, he’s got some service experience of his own, and he ain’t rollin’ over. Democratic leadership, please take notes as this unfolds, this is how it’s done. Take special note of the exceptional display of conviction, confidence, and spine.

[Update Yet Again]: In case there’s any confusion about what it means to attack someone’s service record:

• Wes Clark stated that McCain’s service was exemplary, and stated unequivocally that McCain was a hero. He then stated that McCain’s military experience, in particular flying an aircraft and being shot down, does not necessarily qualify him to handle presidential foreign policy decisions. Got that so far?
• Here’s McCain surrogate, on the other hand, saying on a conference call with the press:
  

  …we all know that General Clark, as high-ranking as he is, his record in his last command I think was somewhat less than stellar.

That’s what it looks like when someone attacks and demeans someone else’s service record.

So, to review: Wes Clark’s comments bring up a point of discussion, about what actually qualifies someone to be president, and argues that even exemplary, heroic military service by itself doesn’t cover all the bases. McCain’s surrogate trashing General Clark’s service as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO is just flinging shit at a political opponent.

What in the hell do people actually do at journalism school?