I was dumbfounded to read yesterday that the Google founders actually granted Playboy a full-length interview a few months ago, when they knew their IPO announcement was imminent. This is a huge no-no, and their PR person should be fired right away. The interview has appeared in the latest issue, sent out to subscribers at the time when Google isn't supposed to be saying a word. Not a single syllable.

"Quiet periods," the time before announcing an IPO or major financial news, are sacred -- you say nothing at all that might influence investor opinion. And they broke this cardinal rule. This should scare smart investors away -- Google has no in-house IR (investor relations) )counsel and their PR people are true amateurs (and I promise, I know). Amazing, but true; you'd think at this late date they'd have the sharpest people in the industry handling all their PR. Instead, they're stumbling like a bunch of amateurs.

My friend Jeremy has posted on his company blog about other reasons to fear the Google IPO. Jeremy and I have both been in high-tech PR for ages, and worked together in Silicon Valley in the late 90's, when we were all going to become multi-millionaires. (Hah.) His points are well-taken.

When it comes to publicly traded Google stock, my mantra, at least for now, is simple: steer clear.

This article is actually quite interesting, and gives both sides of the story. The underlying message: it's he says/she says, with no hope of resolution. And the debate is so silly -- was he in Cambodia or near Cambodia? -- it's obviously an exercise in nitpicking.

What certainly comes across here is that the SBVFT's animosity, as most of us know, stems not from Kerry's actions in Vietnam, but the sense that he betrayed his colleagues by turning against the war. The smart ones realized he never betrayed the; he was protesting against the war and its architects -- not his fellow fighters.

There's an interesting wrap-up:

FactCheck.org, a nonpartisan group that monitors the accuracy of campaign ads, points to the crew members who support Kerry and notes initial funding for the opposition campaign came mainly from a Republican booster in Houston.

But the group added that it can’t definitively say which set of veterans should be believed.

"At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth," the group concluded.

Peter D. Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University who has studied political attitudes of veterans and military members, said the Swift Boat campaign could cost Kerry some support among undecided voters.

But he suggested Democrats want the controversy to continue brewing because it keeps the focus on Kerry’s service in Vietnam and off his tenure in the U.S. Senate, where Republicans want the spotlight.

"The Democrats are very happy to keep that story alive," Feaver said.

That's the big irony here. Whether it was January or February or December when John Kerry was at (or near) Cambodia, repeating this story does one thing for most voters: it reminds them that Kerry served and is a decorated war hero. While it reinforces the Kerry-haters' belief (foolish though it may be) that he's a liar and a rogue, they thought that before the SBVFT came along. So as I've said from day one, it's a net minus for bush. The only media who are picking up the SBVFT's spin are the World Net Dailies and other wingnut media, whose readers already know Kerry is the Antichrist anyway.

A big tempest in a teapot, and the only one to emerge from it looking better is Kerry.

Before I start my new job I'm heading for a few days to Manhattan. I leave tomorrow morning and will be back on Wednesday. Chances are I'll slow down the posting drastically after today.

My site traffic sky-rocketed this week thanks to a dinky post that gave me a zillion google hits. That will now plunge sharply, as it always does when I stop posting for a few days. (Funny, how when I first arrived in Singapore I was grateful to get 75 visitors a day.)

It's nice to see that some commentators maintain a semblance of sanity when discussing this nonsense. After citing a new article that blows away some of the smoke, he says:

So let me get this straight. Kerry did go to Cambodia — even though that was supposedly impossible, he did take CIA guys in — even though that was supposedly absurd, and he did get a hat from one of them — even though that was supposedly a sign of mental instability. The extent of Kerry's malfeasance is that instead of doing it in December, he actually did it in January and February.

Considering that he's mentioned this story only twice, most recently 18 years ago, and it turns out that his only crime is to have tarted it up with a bit of holiday pathos, I think I'll pass on following it any further down the Swift Vets rabbit hole. But thanks to everyone who displayed their deep unseriousness about this election by participating in this smear. It will be remembered.

Deep unseriousness -- indeed, heh, read the whole thing.

Incredible, as we are trapped in the Iraqi quagmire, as jobs are lost and people are thirsting for solutions and real leadership, we are tricked into taking this BS seriously. And war bloggers are aghast and furious that the big media aren't following their lead and covering this non-story 24/7. For once, the media are doing their job and thinking for themselves, instead of chasing baseless rumors that are utterly irrelevant to the election.

For two weeks, that is.

Taiwan could withstand an attack from China for two weeks, military sources told the China Times, in comments seen aimed at assuaging fears raised by a computer simulation showing that Taipei could be captured in six days.

Tensions have been running high in the Taiwan Strait as China prepares for a possible military showdown, convinced Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian will push for formal statehood during his second term.

Both sides are holding their annual war games, with China -- which views the island as a renegade province -- staging mock-invasion drills and Taiwan pretending to fend off an attack.

A computer-simulated exercise showed China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) could take the island's capital in just six days, Taiwan media reported on Wednesday.

But the mass-circulation China Times quoted "authoritative military sources" as saying the computer had made certain assumptions -- such as no help from the United States -- and it did not mean Taiwan would be defeated so quickly.

"The sources indicate, in the event of a 'first strike', the air force and navy can preserve of their fighting capabilities while the army can maintain 80 percent of its fighting capabilities," the newspaper said.

"Under these circumstances, Taiwan can hold on for two weeks in the event of a war in the Taiwan Strait."

Military experts say China is accelerating its arms build-up in preparation for war, but the PLA still lacks sophisticated amphibious vessels to turn its 2.5-million-strong army into a credible invasion force.

Furthermore, the expectation is that Washington would meet its treaty obligation and come to Taiwan's rescue, either through diplomatic pressure on China, intelligence aid or actual combat assistance, analysts say.

If it's any consolation, the computer simulation also shows China would suffer "huge casualties" if it goes the invasion route. Somehow I don't think that's going to be a major factor if and when the CCP decides it needs to invade.

At the DNC, Kerry made an eloquent plea to bush to end the personal attacks and focus instead on the issues that will affect the lives of the American people. bush's response was to ignore the offer; a few days later the SBVFT launched their first salvo, resulting in a veritable orgy of talk-show battles, angry accusations, indignant punditizing and blogosphere pyrotechnics.

Anything goes now. Expect bush's being awol to re-emerge like never before, and expect even greater polarization, if that is conceivable. bush will do anything to hold onto his goodies. But unlike Gore, Kerry will fight equally hard to take them away. The latest outrages will energize him more than ever. Kid gloves are off.

The blogger covering the attacks on Kerry most eloquently is digby, whom I only recently discovered. Here's what he wrote today, a great summary post of the sorry little effort to smear Kerry.

Just keep in mind that the swift boat smear is being done to obscure the fact that our great wartime leader couldn't even fulfill his pathetic little obligation to guard the Alamo during the Vietnam war, which is emblematic of his terrible handling of the war in Iraq and the threat of Islamic fundamentalism. Character will out. That's all it is. And that all of these so-called patriots are willing to smear a man who volunteered and actually served in order to cover for this sad little fellow who never spent a minute outside the cozy comfort of his daddy's protection says a lot more about them than it does about Kerry.

There were many honorable ways to behave during the Vietnam era. There were those who believed in the war and volunteered to fight it. There were those who were drafted and went as a matter of duty. There were those who fought the war, came to believe it was wrong and came back to change the policy. And there were those who believed it was wrong and refused to participate. All of those people stood up for what they believed in and did their duty as they saw it.

There was one group, however, who supported the war but didn't stand up for their beliefs --- refusing to take the heat that being a citizen, particularly a young man, in those days required. They played the system. Many of them "had other priorities" using every possible excuse, all the while vociferously backing the war effort --- as long as someone else fought it. And, the worst of this group were the privileged who supported the war but merely pretended to fight it by having their connections pull strings to get them into safe stateside duty that they could later claim amounted to "service." They would have pictures of themselves looking handsome in their uniforms. And they could swagger around with their buddies and drop casual hints for the rest of their lives about their days in the military. But even those phonies at least actually completed the minimal requirements to claim such affiliation.

It is very rare to find someone who finagled their way into the guard ahead of people who'd been waiting longer, had the government spend huge sums of money training him to be a pilot, quit flying less than two years later of his own accord and then dropped out of sight many months before his duty was fulfilled. It's even rarer to find someone like this declared a fine figure of a man who served his country well --- particularly when there are so many who actually did.

It is a very sad thing to see military men stoop to the level of smearing a combat veteran in a desperate bid to get a fey little richboy legitimately elected. I never thought I'd see the day they would debase their own service and that of all their comrades in order to play cheap partisan politics on behalf of such a man. As one who grew up in as military family, it makes me sick to see it.

Me too.

As most of us know, the blogosphere is ablaze with posts about John Kerry's "Christmas in Cambodia." As usual, Instapuppy is leading the charge, and the "war bloggers" are all on over-time. The issue made its way into comments on this site, and I thought I'd give it a post all its own. I do this with reluctance because the issue isn't really worthy of my time or yours, but I want my take to be on the record. Most of this post is based on a comment I left an hour ago on another site.

We've seen it before. Republican lawyers pore over every word the Democratic candidate has ever said or done, no matter how long ago or in what context, looking for a "Gotcha!" line they can use to embarrass him. They look for a Willie Horton photo. They look to see whether Al Gore was actually present at a fire he said he witnessed years ago. It doesn't have to be of any import; it may be totally innocent or a slip-up or a moment of stupidity. No matter; if they can make it "stick," if it can effectively smear the candidate, then the job has been done.

Do you remember during the last election when Gore made a remark about the cost of his mother's prescription medicine, and it turned out he exaggerated the price? Or how he said he "invented the Internet" (which, of course, he never really said)? The other side seizes on these minor issues and blows them up as though all heaven and earth depends on their authenticity. Gotcha!!

Politicians sometimes embellish. Sometimes they exaggerate. Sometimes they lie (and there, Bush is the absolute king). Sometimes they're misquoted. But to go back and harp on something of at most marginal significance -- to go after it with this pathological vehemence tells us both how desperate and how unscrupulous the Bush people are. And they are so lucky: they have "third parties" doing all the accusing, so just like in the McCain smear of 2000, they can say their hands are clean. Of course, the rumor mongers are financed by Republican fat cats and led by Reagan's former PR director, but never mind.

The very worst thing we can learn from the Christmas nonsense is that Kerry lied. Maybe he took a story he heard and adopted it as his own. Maybe he was near Cambodia, and he embellished and romanticized something that happened -- I don't know. Maybe he lied altogether. Okay, Kerry lied. But of course, there are lies and there are lies. A lie like this hurt no one; it perhaps tells us something about the man, but similar stuff can be found on just about every politician. It's all a smokescreen to detract from the issues that matter.

The Christmas in Cambodia fantasy story and the SBVFT story intertwine, the former being an outgrowth of the latter. Warbloggers keep referring to the "200 witnesses" cited in Unfit to Command, but most of the evidence is based on hearsay and old anecdotes, and most of the men hate Kerry for one reason, his anti-Vietnam War stance. Period, end of story. What we do know is that 9 out of 10 of the men who actually served on Kerry's boat swear by him. Those SBVFT who are hyping the media weeks before the election (funny, how they came out with this big story at this strategic moment!) were rounded up by Kerry's 30-year nemesis John O'Neill, and were choreographed by Merrie Spaeth (who does PR work for -- seatbelt fastened? -- Halliburton!). The whole things smells like a sewer. The Christmas story and the stories of Kerry's poor leadership, all fanned by John O'Neill, were all over the cable news shows this week. But I have not heard a single man or woman of character in the media or in government embrace them as truth. Those I respect, and even some I don't, have instead denounced the whole effort as inappropriate and disgusting -- and bad for the bush campaign. People like John McCain. Like John MLaughlin. Even Pat Buchanan. Even Bill O'Reilly condemned the tactics of the SBVFT.

Christmas in Cambodia is all a big flashback to 2000, another Karl Rove dirty trick, and thank God there are far more pressing issues the voters are desperate to focus on -- little things, like their jobs, the sick economy, a worthless war in Iraq in which their children and spouses are at risk, obscene tax cuts for the rich that will cost their children for generations. Just little stuff. Of course, the cynical commenters here believe all these issues should be off the table while we all expend our energy and time looking into a meaningless and perhaps frivolous statement or lie Kerry has made about his being in Cambodia 30-some years ago.

The marvelous news is it just won't work. It can't. We are watching Najaf being pounded today (justifiably or not), we saw the "recovery" implode a week ago with the wretched jobs report, and the deficit is approaching half-a trillion dollars. And we should all slam on the brakes and only worry about where Kerry was at Christmas in 1970 or whenever it was. No, thank you.

Again, let's assume the worst: Kerry lied. bush's myriad lies about his military service (no, not the awol issue but how long he trained as a pilot) are rich and well documented. He won't even answer questions about his alleged coke addiction. The list of serious bush lies makes Kerry's awful, terrible, despicable "Christmas" lie seem thoroughly insignificant. People lie. I've lied, you've lied, everyone's lied. What sets the lies apart are the consequences that result from those lies. And in this area, shrub is the big winner over Kerry, hands down.

Keep banging the drum for this silly story. Few serious people care. It may arise now and then through the election, it may put a dent in the poll numbers for a week, and it'll give Sean Hannity mutliple orgasms for a while. But people have far more to worry about this year, far more at stake to make their decision based solely on a stupid anecdote.

Last comment: The comments from the usual suspects are predictable: "Where was John Forbes Kerry on such-and-such date when he said he was in Cambodia??? Why did he lie?" Answer: I don't know, but I think he'll be addressing the question himself soon enough. He may well have lied; I don't know. I can't say I completely don't care -- if he lied, I'd rather he hadn't, the way I'd rather Gore had given us the real price of his mother's medicine. It matters, but very little. We already have a president who is a sociopath, a man who lies constantly and in a harmful manner. We are turning the corner. We are in great danger. We are safer now than before we invaded Iraq. We are experiencing great jobs growth. The tax cuts are working. We know them all -- they are so casual, it's impossible to divorce his truths from his prevarications. So why should I care about Kerry's very minor lie, except to admit it troubles me and I hope he learned from it. You see, bush has been caught in one lie after another but never seems to care about the past, let alone learn from it. I believe -- and I admit, it's a "faith-based" belief -- that Kerry is a bigger man than bush, a humbler man, one who listens and learns and grows, a man who is imperfect but infinitely wiser than what we've got. To now reject him and stick with a proven liar and warmonger, a man who turned the world's best economy into a trainwreck and fought a war of personal revenge at the expense of 1,000 American lives -- to do this all because Kerry once said he spent Christmas in Cambodia, whether a truth or a lie, would be absurd in the extreme.

So mock on about Kerry's egregious sin. Attack away. People who think for themselves know better, and reject such superficial and distracting smokescreens for what they are.

Update: Oh, I forgot how on Hannity & Colmes the other night, General Tommy Franks was presented with all this crap about SBVFT and Christmas in Cambodia and he, too rejected it. He said he believed kerry is indeed fit to serve as president, though he hinted he will be voting for bush. Hannity was quite miffed when he couldn't get the general to slime Kerry. No one of integrity will.

New Jersey Gov. James E. McGreevey on TV just said he had a sexual affair with a man and is resigning. Incredible. I'm in shock -- this is amazing. He admits he's gay. Unprecedented.

Update: Video clip here.

This may be one of the oddest stories I've read in a long time, a true candidate for News of the Weird. Be sure to click the link at the end of the post to see some of Zhang's work, and to read about his, um, unusual approach to art.

Just because it made me laugh....

This is really rich. The man named the "Godfather" of the Swift Boat Cretins for Bush, Ted Sampley, levelled parallel charges of cowardice and lack of integrity against -- are your ready -- George Herbert Walker Bush! You simply have to read this to believe it. Apparently it wasn't only Vietnam vets who were given undeserved medals, but WWII vets as well. Have they no shame? None at all? Hell, why don't we just condemn all US veterans as lying, cowardly bastards?

And these men, the SBVFT, are dominating the news. These little pieces of shit, led by Ted Sampley and blatant anti-Semite/anti-Catholic Jerome Corsi. Read the Digby post and and check the other links, and you will see this is one of the ugliest, sleaziest smear jobs in American history, carried out by scumbags who live to slander. It's unbelievable! And, of course, it's pure, vintage Karl Rove. It's his modus operandi, 100 percent.

One day we will look back at this with the revulsion and anger we feel when we look back at McCain's character assassination in 2000. This is a sick episode in US politics, rivalling the crimes of Nixon's CREEP back in the 70s. We will wonder how we ever allowed ourselves for even an instant to be sucked into this bullshit.

UPDATE: Yet more on Sampley. Unbelievable.

Thanks to a reader's comment, I see that the Three Gorges Probe has actually put on its site the entire text of Yangtse! Yangtse!, the 1989 book that anticipated many of the Three Gorges Dam's worst problems, including 10 new chapters. The author Dai Qing was arrested during the post-Tiananmen Square backlash and the book was banned (though I'm not certain whether it still is).

You can browse through this for hours. It offers a wonderful look into how the CCP operated then, and I suspect it's not dramatically different now. From the preface:

The materials in this book condemn the Chinese government's plan to build the world's largest dam in the scenic Three Gorges area of the Yangtze River. These documents are also an indictment of the political system that produced this decision. The contributors to this volume are generally not liberal, Westernized dissidents. Many are long-time loyal communists; others are veteran members of China's normally compliant satellite parties. These are not the young idealists who filled Beijing's streets in the democracy movement of 1989, but largely elderly officials with scientific and technical backgrounds who have opposed the dam out of a genuine concern for China's economic health and political stability.

The criticisms that fill the following pages focus on a closed decision-making process that grossly distorts technical data and analyses to meet the political needs of a self-sustaining elite. Despite high-level rhetoric since the inauguration of China's reforms in 1978 about creating more "open" (kaifang) and "democratic and scientific" policy-making, this book portrays a Party-state apparatus that remains profoundly authoritarian in structure and function. Outspoken opponents of the project have been silenced, especially since June, 1989, as key decision-making arenas deliberating on the Three Gorges dam have been packed with obedient and technically illiterate supporters.

Opposition views are not treated as mere differences of opinion, but evidence of disloyalty and "counter-revolutionary" intent. The political atmosphere surrounding the controversy over the dam is no different from the late 1950s when early critics, such as Chairman Mao Zedong's ex-secretary Li Rui, were branded as "anti-Party." Yangtze! Yangtze! itself has been a victim of the intense politicizing of this issue and the book was banned in 1989. Crushing students in Tiananmen Square not only allowed the communist leadership to remain securely in power, but also provided convenient cover to purge the Party and state apparatus of dam opponents.

The following documents, in short, portray a bare-knuckles political battle in which opposition to construction of the dam involves enormous risks. Western observers who portray policy-making in China as a process of "consensus-building" and "bargaining" must confront the realities described in the following pages. The fundamental lack of checks and balances in the Chinese political system is made explicit through the proliferation of committees that are used to confound and confuse rather than to enlighten. Newspapers carry only "positive reporting" on the dam; microphones at the National People's Congress (NPC) meeting considering the issue are shut off; and prominent opponents, such as the eminent scientist Qian Jiaju, are left with no choice but exile.

In the book's afterward, Dai Qing pleads, "There is only one Yangtze River and we have already subjected it to many stupid deeds. Such stupidity must not be repeated." While the book is credited with delaying construction of the dam, it obviously failed: the dam is being built, and much of the misery predicted by its authors is materializing right on schedule.

No, that's not my own opinion. It is apparently the opinion of all those Republicans who are now accusing Kerry and the US Navy of commisserating to doctor his war record and assign him medals he didn't deserve. That's how Digby sees it.

It has struck me lately what a terrible indictment of the military these charges are and how once again the Republicans have absolutely no limits in terms of how fully they are willing to trash the American institutions they allegedly love in order to win. What these people are saying is that the US Navy awarded some of its highest medals for bravery to a coward. The many officers who signed those glowing fitness reports and awarded those citations are either liars or they are incompetent. The word of his shipmates, even the man whose life he saved, are worth nothing. You can't believe military documentary evidence. It was all bullshit, every last piece of it. And because of this it can now be said that all medals awarded for bravery are suspect. A superior military record is no longer a recommendation. Who can ever believe the government on this issue, now?

...
The conservative attack on the military is, on the other hand, so small minded, so parochial. For puny, partisan reasons they are accusing the military of widespread corruption --- merely to excuse the behavior of their less than stellar candidate.

...
Too bad for the men and women who are risking their necks as we speak for Junior's Big Adventure. Any act of bravery on which the military might bestow a medal is now subject to interpretation. Nothing is sacred to these people.

Even more shocking is what these conservatives are now saying about John McCain. You simply have to see this to believe it -- McCain slandered by the right and even accused of treason and cowardice. Why? Because he's still decent to John Kerry and condemns the Swift Boat Cretins for Bush attack ad against his friend and fellow war hero.

I can't wait for the elections to end.

This is big news -- it blows up the meme they want us all to believe, namely that this was just the aberrant behavior of a few "bad apples."

NBC News has learned a military investigation into prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison now implicates military intelligence officers in addition to military police already charged.

Pentagon sources tell NBC News the investigation by Maj. Gen. George Fay recommends punitive action, which could include criminal charges against several military intelligence officers who were at least aware of the abuse.

At a pre-trial hearing for Pfc. Lynndie England last week there was direct testimony by a military intelligence officer that three intelligence officers were present during the abuse of three prisoners at Abu Ghraib. The officer testified he was summoned to the cellblock to, "see something cool."

Photos show the prisoners stripped naked, handcuffed and forced to simulate sex acts. At least one intelligence officer is seen throwing a toy football at the prisoners.

It will be much harder now for the military to whitewash this. And if it comes out that these MI officers were actually ordering the "bad apples" to terrorize the prisoners, the lid will really come blowing off this story, which Rumsfeld has been praying would simply evaporate in the mist of memory.

I know a winner when I see one. Spoken by James Carville today on Crossfire:

John Kerry, Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Katie Couric, CBS, NBC are all communists. Hillary Clinton is a lesbian fat hog with fake hair. Al and Tipper Gore are terrorists who are part of the Taliban. The pope is senile. And pedophilia is fine with him as long as it's not reported in the liberal press. If you think all this sounds nutty, well, it is.

According to the organization Media Matters For America, all this has been written by Jerome Corsi. Why do we care what Jerome Corsi says? Well, we don't. But as co-author of the book "Unfit for Command" about John Kerry and his service in Vietnam, some people are making the mistake of taking him seriously. In the world of putrid right-wing pond scum, Corsi is one of the biggest bottom-feeders of them all.

So much for the "salt-of-the-earth" SBVFT who wrote this book. They may all be splendid men, but the fact that they turned to this POS to do their writing certainly says something.

[Link via Duncan.]

....While Tim "Pumpkinhead" Russert sits and watches. (He was supposed to be moderating.) There's a great analysis of this journalistic embarrassment over at the best blog out there. You'll see just how pathological O'Reilly is (in case you need to be reassured). Good comments, too.

The story isn't over, and the reports I've been reading are worse than what came out a few months ago. Much worse. Why are stories like this being ignored and/or sanitized?

We all know that Lee Kuan Yew and his family own Singapore and always will, and no one much minds. After all, he's one of those rare benevolent dictators who actually improved his people's lives.

Still, I couldn't help chuckling when I read this piece on his son Lee Hsien Loong taking over as prime minister.

Lee's ascent to premier could stir talk of a concentration of power in the Lee family. With the elder Lee remaining in cabinet and his son as premier, the two occupy two of the top government posts in Southeast Asia's wealthiest country.

The younger Lee's wife, Ho Ching, is executive director of powerful government investment arm Temasek Holdings, which owns stakes in a crop of Singapore firms such as Singapore Airlines and Singapore Telecommunications, whose chief executive is Lee's brother, Lee Hsien Yang.

"Stir talk of a concentration of power"? Whatever could lead the reporter to that silly conclusion? Dumbest thing I ever heard. Two strokes of the cane for that journalist.

And remember, Singapore is by far the least corrupt country in Southeast Asia, and one of the least corrupt in the world.

Teacup in a Storm, a 10-year-old HK political radio talk show will soon be yanked as tensions between HK's media and their new government in Beijing appear to increase. This article recaps what's going on and how things over at Hong Kong's Commercial Radio may reflect deeper strains in the One Country/Two Systems paradigm.

Famously objective Spinsanity -- it goes after Kerry and bush spinsters with equal energy -- calls into question the ad and web site for Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and points out how they subtly and dishonestly spin the truth.

[Update: Another excellent critique of the SBVFT can be found here]

This is just too terrible. Just when I thought the story of Henan province's AIDS tragedy couldn't possibly get any worse, China manages to surprise me. I guess I should learn by now that no matter how dreadful it seems, there's always room for more despair when it comes to China's disenfranchised.

I have deleted this post and its comments as I had serious cause to doubt its authenticity. My apologies.

A day or two ago I predicted that from now to November we will all be assaulted with references to terrorism from the government like never before. This is necessary, I said, because terrorism is seen as bush's strong suit, so they need to keep it top of mind from now through the elections. It has to drown out Iraq and the economy.

So I'm not surprised (though I am sickened) to see how Tom Ridge and his Department of Re-election Security plan to further inculcate us with a renewed dosage of terrorism hysteria just in time for the RNC.

The Homeland Security Department is enlisting allies in its effort to prepare the nation for another terrorist attack: your kids and your boss.

Starting next month, children in grades 4 though 8 and employers nationwide will be asked to help get families and companies better prepared to respond to a crisis.

In schools, on the Internet and in TV and radio ads, youngsters will be introduced to a new Homeland Security mascot: a dog (an American shepherd) that will be named in a contest. The campaign, using the dog and a set of Ad Council advertisements, will encourage families to develop an emergency plan and talk about where kids should go, who will pick them up and how they will make contact.

Let's see, September 11 was nearly three years ago. And now, 11 weeks before the election, they're going to start brainwashing our kiddies with "Duck and Cover"-style bullshit about terror, as though we all need to be thinking about terror all the time.

Don't get me wrong; we all need to have our eyes opened and be vigilant. But to start indoctrinating the kids like this in a subject over which they have very little control, and to do so at such a politically strategic time -- well, suffice it to say I'm just a tad skeptical and cynical about the whole thing, and it fits hand in glove with my prediction of a sharp uptick in "terror awareness" (as if we aren't already OD'ing on it).

And it's going to get dramatically worse prior to November. They'll stop at literally nothing, and there's little Kerry can do lest he appear unpatriotic and unconcerned with terrorism, the buzzword of our age. Luckily, it's not working so far, as people continue to cite the economy as by far their No. 1 concern when they step into the voting booth. And by playing fast and loose with the terrorism alerts, and by proving our ineptitude by outing a vital al Qaeda double agent who'd come over to our side, bush isn't doing such a great job this week convincing us he's the best answer to terrorism.

[Link via All Spin Zone.]

A lot of people are coming here (and I mean a lot, at least for this site) looking for a picture of the world's hairiest man Yu Zhenhuan. You'll find that photo here. Enjoy.

Update:
Oh, alright - here's another.

As expected, "terror" has once more become the word of the day as the Republican convention approaches. Kerry and Edwards were dominating the news and despite lack of a dramatic post-DNC bounce, they're now closing in dramtically on issues that bush "owned," like terror. So, as we all know by now, the terror alert is raised, bush tells us all we are "in danger" and Ridge, who is never, ever political, tells us the latest threats were only discovered thanks to the bold leadership of gwb and his glorious "war on terror." (Never mind that most -- all? -- of the "new information" was years old, the most recent being from 8 months ago.)

There's an excellent piece in the Chicago Sun-Times by William O'Rourke that clarifies just how important the terror issue is to bush, and why it is crucial for him to keep it top of mind for everyone from now until election day.

Terror alerts are mini-"October surprises" for this administration, ready to be employed anytime President Bush wants to move the Kerry-Edwards campaign off the front page for a few days. The ''cry wolf'' factor is high. Tom Ridge's claim that his Homeland Security Department ''doesn't do politics" rings hollow, given his political background and the boss he is beholden to. Bush can shout, ''We're a nation in danger'' in the Rose Garden anytime he wishes, but the public may yet conclude that the danger is the president's judgment....

There was a lot of talk among Democrats before the convention about the need to introduce Kerry to the nation. The GOP's task is different. The public doesn't want to know more about Bush, because when it has looked into his background, it has found a nest of bad news: Bush's sketchy military service, his drinking, his various failed businesses. The two Kerry daughters managed to make their father seem like ''the real deal'' in their convention speeches, but it is difficult to imagine the Bush twins introducing their father with amusing anecdotes about the early years with dad.

But Bush has been "born again" in a number of ways: his election to governor of Texas and his embracing of Jesus as his savior canceled, more or less, his previous history. And his presidency was born again on 9/11. The White House characterizes this campaign as one about the "future," not the "past."

Unlike Ronald Reagan, Bush is no father figure: He is the big brother who will beat up -- or have beaten up -- anyone who offends his family. The latest elevated terror alert will make it easier to turn mid-Manhattan into an armed camp for the upcoming Republican convention.

As much as possible, the Bush campaign will try to keep the public focused on the homeland. The 9/11 Commission has become a blessing for Bush. The hearings, as well as the president's feints toward approving some of its recommendations -- including another terror czar -- lets what is happening here be the news throughout the fall, rather than what is going on in Iraq.

For what is going on in Iraq is more bad news for Bush. Al-Qaida in the Big Apple is, perversely, a safer topic. The president will keep reminding the public that ''We're a nation in danger.'' The photos associated with terror alerts are now familiar: police wearing layers of military protection, an arm cradling an automatic rifle. It's the GOP convention theme to come -- A Nation in Danger: Re-elect Bush-Cheney.

This is key: We need to be distracted from Iraq, not to mention our basket-case economy. The only thing that will distract us while at the same time reflecting well on bush is terror. So the message is, Be afraid; be very afraid. And because we are all in danger, we need someone who can stay the course and be tough on the terrorists. Never mind that in Iraq all of our resolve and toughness has wrecked our economy and divided the nation like nothing else since Vietnam. People remember only what's in front of them, and if it's all terrror all the time, Iraq will seep into the quicksand of memory.

So I hereby promise you, this will be National Terrorism Month. Expect more and more "top al Qaida leaders" we never heard of to be caught by Pakistanis and sent off to distant places for interrogation, where we'll never hear from them again. Expect the Republican convention to be a veritable orgy of terrorism propaganda. Expect everything else to be sidelined and scuttled. Expect Kerry and Edwards to literally fight to be heard amid the din of the ominous terrorist threats. Expect "chatter" to reach alarming levels and more computers to be found conveniently diagramming all the buildings al Qaida intends to demolish.

The terror threat is real. Perhaps a lot of the information we've learned is really vital. But it is always delivered to the public in a manner that reeks of poilitics. It is used to instill panic and justify anything buish does. By politicizing it, by Tom Ridge telling us in the midst of his warning that we all need to be grateful to bush, by pressuring Pakistan to deliver the goods before the election, by keeping us in a constant state of fear and anxiety, and by making terrorism the issue for his re-election, bush has made us cynical beyond words.

Alabama Mail Room Veterans for Bush. Savage and funny.

Via The Drum.

I want to request any readers who come here for commentary on China to go read this post as soon as you can. I don't know how I missed it when Stephen wrote it more than a week ago.

As I read it, I began to highlight paragraphs I wanted to include here, and then I realized that would be fruitless; you simply need to read the entire post. It's beautifully written, and manages to build up to its climax in a way that leaves the reader speechless.

UPDATE: For those of you unable to read the post in China thanks to the government's paranoia, here it is in full:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China like Beijing a Conjuror's Trick

She calls it a "city of the future", a

"...vast ‘Star Trek’ city of huge glass domes, mirrored skyscrapers reflecting the sun in a thousand directions, neatly gardened boulevards, and mammoth expressways that circle the city, some of them 10 lanes wide and all with traffic that seemingly never sleeps."

But unlike so many of our politicians and captains of our industries, journalist Georgie Ann Geyer can see past this facade that is modern day Beijing.

In her article "China's Communist party Governs In Name Only" journalist Georgie Anne Parker recounts a recent trip back to Beijing, a city she first reported from 21 years ago as a correspondent/columnist and which she has has visited several times since, the last over 10 years ago.

Parker talks about the new Beijing, it sensuousness, it’s color, it’s embrace of everything new. Of how, in a resort city she visited there are pictures of "smiling Mao Tse-tungs, Chou En-lais and Deng Xiaopings, all telling visitors in Chinese lettering to please enjoy themselves in China."

But this new Beijing, this new China does not fool her as it does others. She rightly points out that

"It was easy in the "old days," she says, " when I first came here, to feel and see how repressive it truly was."

Something that the world seems blind to but Geyer sees

"One of the tricks of this complex new order is that the sheen and glitziness of the cities make it easy for foreigners to think everything has changed. "

"Yet underneath that seductive surface, no one seems to care too much about the old concepts of human rights"

Now the endless line of foreign dignitaries and captains of industry jostling for position to sup at the table of this emerging world economy are greeted by an illusion. An illusion of breathtaking change that they either actually believe goes right through the fabric of Chinese society or perhaps "choose" to believe it in an attempt to assuage their own consciences as they line their country's or company's pockets.

Behind this facade that is the "New China" remains the" old China." The China of cruel repression, of false imprisonment and death. As the glass skyscrapers of the new China catch and reflect the light so a person can not easily see inside so to does the new China attempt to hide itself behind the "sheen", as Geyer puts it, of modernity. But it is but glass and despite the glare it can be seen through if one wants to.

Only 15 years last month the Tiananmen Square massacre occurred. The world was justifiably outraged. The European Union slapped on an arms embargo the Australian prime minister of the the time even cried at the news.

Five years ago this month the persecution of the Falun Gong began which has according to some sources seen the deaths of up to 5,000 people and the torture and incarceration of up to 30,000. The world initially took notice but despite the persecution continuing unabated the world no longer seems to care.

Seven weeks ago China, without one skerrick of concern for international opinion, kidnapped and held incommunicado Dr Jiang Yanyong a man of international prominence. The world for all intents and purposes ignored it.

22 days ago the Chinese government executed an Uygur for "subversion" and separatist activities, the third to be executed within ten months despite not a shred of evidence that there has been one "terrorist" type incident carried out by the Uygurs since 1998. The politicians and the captains of industry response? They do not care of this death or the others.

Ten days ago the Chinese arrested 100 underground Church leaders holding a meeting in Xinjiang. Were they plotting to overthrow the government to warrant such a heavy handed response from Beijing? No, they were meeting to discuss some strategies to convert Uygur muslims to Christianity.

We see what we want to see, we believe what we want to believe.

Magician’s tricks are truly magic if we want to believe them to be so or are correctly seen as just sleight of hand if we do not. In China's magic act we seem to want to choose to believe the conjuror.

We have given China the Olympics supposedly a movement that mirrors the highest and purest ideals of humanity. What have we got in return? 12 pieces of silver for selling our souls.

And there can never be enough. This one, First Draft, is manned by the bloggers who stood in for Atrios last week when he was at the DNC. It looks promising.

Just in case you think there's any legitimacy to the certifiable lunatics behind the new anti-Kerry book, please go here for some quick enlightenment.

I was delighted to see John McLaughlin side with Eleanor Clift on last night's McLaughlin Group to condemn the book -- and to criticize bush for not openly and personally condemning it. The two almost never agree; when he joined her recently in calling the Iraq war a mistake, it was big news. Wonderful to see how bush continues to alienate intelligent conservatives.

Update: Great wrap-up post on the whole mess over at Skippy.

Lest we forget just how agonizingly stupid our commander in chief really is:

Q:What do you think tribal sovereignty means in the 21st century, and how do we resolve conflicts between tribes and the federal and the state governments?

THE PRESIDENT: Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a -- you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And, therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.

The most powerful man in the history of the planet, and he's dumber than a brick.

Via Oliver Willis.