Book of the month

T is for Terrible, by Peter McCarty

I have already confessed that I am a huge nerd. So I hope you will believe me when I say that I have read a lot of books.

This one is the Best Book Ever.

I was walking through Porter Square a month or so ago and saw this new bookstore. It looked like just another hippie store, and so I wasn't too interested in staying, but my mom was visiting and she wanted to look around a bit. So I went to the children's book section and poked around. As soon as I saw the cover, I was sold.







I thumbed through it and began to giggle uncontrollably. I bought it immediately, with the thought that I would give it to my niece or one of my nephews. But when I got home and read it again, I decided to keep it for myself. Imaginary readers, believe me when I tell you that this is the apex of English literature. Shakespeare, Milton, Eliot-- all of them steps toward this, the pinnacle.







This is a great book. My friend Max, who is getting an English PhD at Harvard, agrees with me. So does everyone else I have shown this book to. During the ALCS and the world series, every time David Ortiz stepped up to the plate we would recite passages from the book. He cannot help that he is so enormous, and so enormously hungry. He cannot help that the ground shakes when he runs.

And look at the pictures!



I guess what I am saying is, buy this book. Buy one for each small child that you love. Because denying them this book is like denying them shoes, or milk. It's a crime.

And next time a big fat hungry dinosaur chases you, take a moment to remember that he can not help that he is so terrible, and so terribly hungry. But he is, so don't stop and try to make friends.

--CHISAIBU

War crimes watch

Gilly has the goods on the real terrorist. You know who I mean.

--J. FNORD WEISHAUPT

P.S. Last night in Harvard Square there was a big choir of LaRouchies singing a requiem or something. Very baroque-sounding. They all had signs either condeming Bush and/or Cheney or endorsing Kerry. I didn't see any signs about Edwards; I'm not sure what that means. But what an incredible collection of wild-eyed nuts. Is it just Halloween, or are these people scary all year round? Whatever. I can't wait for this election to be over. Just let whoever wins, win decisively, so that these moonbats will shut their crazy-holes. Anything, even four years of Kerry, is better than this parade of insanity.

Thanks, Red Sox

(I thought posted this earlier, but it seems that Blogger ate it. So, a repost.)

I am not a native New Englander or a lifelong Sox fan, so my own happiness at seeing the Red Sox win the world series pales in comparison to the elation felt by many, many others. But I think this headline says it all: Take that curse and shove it. Thanks, idiots.

--JOHNNY D

Iraqi civilian deaths

I haven't had time to read the full report yet, but this summary gives me plenty to think about. To summarize the summary, in the eighteen months since the American invasion of Iraq, civilian death rates appear to be 1.5 times higher than they were in the last year or so of Saddam's rule. (This does not include data from Fallujah. With the Fallujah data, the rate is nearly 2.5 times higher.)

It is important to note that this study is examining all civilian deaths, and that 70-90% of them are from things like heart attacks. So pay no attention to anti-warriors who say this means American GIs have killed a hundred thousand Iraqis.

That said, it is troubling to note that the civilian death rate is higher now than under Saddam. To be specific, the report says that one hundred thousand more Iraqis died this year than would have died under Saddam. That is hard to believe. UNICEF and other opponents of the UN-mandated sanctions claimed that about sixty thousand infants and children were dying each year as a result of the sanctions. So I think there's something hinky about these numbers. As I said, though, I haven't read the full report yet, much less broken it down and figured it out.

But if any of my imaginary readers have some insight into this report, please enlighten me by leaving a comment.

--ABDUL ALEM

Bush tells American people not to elect him

Since I pointed out Senator Kerry's detour into self-parody, I am legally obligated to point out this statement by President Bush:

"...a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief."

Well, then...

(Sorry, imaginary readers. I love Bush, too. But this one red-lines the irony-meter.)

--JAN DEPAUW

(UPDATE: I know Bush would dispute that he jumped to conclusions without knowing the facts vis-a-vis Iraq. For the record, I would dispute that, too. But Kerry would likewise dispute my characterization of his efforts in Vietnam. But both of them, or more accurately, both of their speechwriters, would have done well to anticipate how these statements would sound to the opposition.)

(UPDATE 10/28: Copycat.)

President Bush, please stop calling me

Greetings, imaginary readers. No attempts at insight today. Just whining.

This morning, I got another call from Republican fundraisers, wanting to get money out of me for the final, critical days of the election. (Perhaps they also want money for the recount-- we didn't get that far in the call.) I donated fifty bucks to the Bush campaign late in the spring, but I think it's safe to say that they have spent more than fifty bucks trying to get me to give them more money. I hope Bush wins, but I don't have any more money to give him. I'm not just broke-- I'm in debt. This summer I was selling old textbooks to pay my rent. I'm poor.

And now, I wish I had given that fifty dollars to someone who would have spent it on something besides trying to get more donations. If I had a time machine, I would go back and tell me to give the money to Operation Give, or Spirit of America, or Truth About Iraq. Those organizations could all have used the money, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have wasted it on telemarketing.

In fact, I would say that my experience has discouraged me from donating to political campaigns in the future. From my point of view, Bush's campaign squandered the money I donated, and I don't like that. I also don't like getting hassled for money.

I like the federal do not call list. My name is on it. Maybe future campaigns should have a "do not call" option, too.

--MAJOR BLUDD

Kerry vows to bail out of War on Terror after four months

"With the same energy ... I put into going after the Viet Cong and trying to win for our country, I pledge to you I will hunt down and capture or kill the terrorists before they harm us," Kerry said. "And we will wage a war on terror that makes America proud and brings the world to our side."

Coming from a man who seems to have spent much more energy trying to get himself out of Vietnam than getting a victory in Vietnam, this statement does little to persuade me that Kerry will be stalwart in the fight against Islamo-fascists. If only he had pledged to devote the same energy that he has put into talking about going after the Viet Cong, I could feel better about a Kerry victory.

--SUNSHINE DAVE RAHIMI

(UPDATE, 7:14 PM: I'm not the only one who's worried about this.)

Show trial

Check out the link-fest over at the Politburo Diktat. Of particular interest to me are Rusty's observations on life in the academy, and Superhawk's apprehensions about Saudi attempts to influence the election through manipulation of oil prices, which I wrote about several months ago. What is particularly interesting about this story is that it conflicts with the idea that Bush is a puppet of the Saudi royal family. Anyway, enough blogging. Back to work.

--REDBEARD

Uncoordinated

A note to those who believe in a vast, right-wing blogger conspiracy, obediently parroting carefully orchestrated leaks: This is what a coordinated assault looks like. And you know what? As Ace says, it's "not even close to decimating."

Believing that all the blogger attacks on Kerry come from a single source is a convenient fantasy. Myself, I am convinced that you do not need a conspiracy to get an assault that looks coordinated. All you need is a group of tenacious, inquisitive skeptics who are all interested in the same thing and are determined to keep pushing and prodding until they find what they are looking for.

Left-leaning reporters are more skeptical of the Republicans and so they are more dogged in their pursuit of stories that discredit Bush. Right-leaning bloggers are more skeptical of the Democrats and so they are more dogged in their pursuit of stories that discredit Kerry. Of course, professional journalists usually believe themselves to be unbiased reporters of objective fact, whereas bloggers usually are happy to admit that they are spouting their opinions. (This is not to say that blogs are without checks and balances, but that is a discussion for another day.) And of course, right-leaning bloggers are perhaps half of the blogosphere, whereas left-leaning reporters are a dominant majority.

But to return to the point, the whole point of the blogosphere is that it is a place where a thousand flowers bloom, like it or not. I would say that organizing a blogger attack is like herding cats, but that's not really true. Because anyone who reads blogs knows that bloggers tend to move in herds. But blog stampedes are self-organized and self-organizing.

It's like the invisible hand. Capitalism does not require a conspiracy. People want to buy, people want to sell. Letting them hook up with each other usually makes for greater efficiency than trying to manage or command economic development. Same story with the blogosphere. I won't say that there are never attempts to herd bloggers-- obviously there are. But it's less efficient. The real piranha blog frenzies don't require leaders. They just happen, believe it or not. Fast and furious? That's the blogosphere.

(Oh, for those of my imaginary readers who are sick of all the meta-story discussion, here's the actual story that today's post is about.)

--ABDUL ALEM

Blogroll update

Howdy, imaginary readers. Just updating the old blogroll.

Let's start out with a couple of guys who I have been reading since forever, and probably so have you. First, Citizen Smash, a protest warrior and soldier whose military insights I find invaluable. Second, Frank J., whose In My World episodes allow me to dispense violent justice to unwashed hippies vicariously.

And now some terrific reference sites. Friends of Saddam is a blog dedicated to following the ongoing investigation into corruption in the UN administration of the Iraqi Oil-For-Food program. The Iraq Blog Count is your one-stop shop for Iraqi blogs. If someone over there is blathering on the net, IBC has the link.

I also want to link to a few friends of friends. The Llamas introduced me to Cake Eater Chronicles and the Hatemonger's Quarterly, and I have come to love both. Ditto Son of Nixon, who I found via the Ace of Spades.

Next, two blogs who have linked to my previous post. Thanks, Cartago Delenda Est and Esoteric Diatribe! Last, I don't remember where I found these, but they're both pretty cool: Airborne Combat Engineer and CyberPirate.

I ought to write more about all these folks, but it's time for me to quit messing about on the computer and get back to work.

--THE HOUSE