Altercation

• August 6, 2004 | 11:21 AM ET

Slacker Friday

I’ve got a new “Think Again” column excoriating the media coverage of the DNC Convention.  Beyond that, I think we have a strong Slacker Friday, for August at least.

Name: Charles Pierce
Hometown: Newton, MA
Hey Doc:
Let's see.  This week, the Kerry campaign picked up the support of Bruce Springsteen, John Fogerty, the Dixie Chicks, Dave Matthews, and Jurassic 5.  The Bush campaign picked up the support of...

Peggy Noonan.

Anyway, as long as John C.'s there, if the big ensemble finale number of the tour isn't "Fortunate Son," refunds should immediately be provided.  None of this mush-headed "I Shall Be Released" business.  I'm very serious about this.

(I remember what happened in the hall back 30 years ago, dead in the middle of the Watergate winter, when The Master was touring with The Band, and he got to that line in "It's Alright, Ma," about, "Even the president of the United States, sometime must have to stand naked."  The roof caved in.  I expect about two hours of that kind of thing from these shows.)

This has bounced all around the blogosphere for a couple of days.  Seems Katherine Harris is campaigning just as hard for C-Plus Augustus as she did the last time around.  Note well her reported encounter with the mayor of Carmel, Indiana about a plot foiled thereabouts.

At a loose moment, I decided to commit a little Actual Journalism, so I called Jim Brainard, the amiable mayor of lovely Carmel -- pronounced "CAR-mel," and not "Car-MEL," which is that twee place in California over which Clint Eastwood once presided -- and we had a nice chat.  Mayor Brainard told me there was "only so much he could say because this is a security matter."  (And, by the by, shouldn't a U.S. congressperson be more discreet about national security than is the mayor of Carmel, Indiana?)  However, Mayor Brainard particularly wanted me to know one thing:

"I have never spoken to Katherine Harris," he told me.  "I think she must have confused me with somebody else."

Yeah, that must be it.

So, Actual Journalism Moment No. Two: I call the congressperson's office and ask the congressperson's spokesperson to explain what may be going on here.  Lo and behold, about 15 minutes later calls back not the flack, but Herself, which is fairly unusual for a congressperson, who told me that she'd never claimed to have spoken directly with His Honor, Mayor Brainard.

"What I said was that I'd heard it (the story) second-hand," the congressperson said, "and that it was a marvelous example of how we as citizens can be vigilant, especially since I was in Venice (Florida), which is where some of the (9/11) hijackers trained."

She also gave me a lot of off-the-record stuff that, of course, I can't use, due to the rules of Actual Journalism.  However, I feel that the real problem with Actual Journalism is that so many people tell the truth in different ways.

Name: Stupid
Hometown: Chicago
Hey Eric, it's Stupid to battle the hobgoblin.  It would be easy to call the anti-war movement hypocritical with respect to Iran.  For months we've heard a mantra about how the Iraq war was solely about Weapons of Mass Destruction, that Dubya lied about Saddam having WMDs and ties to Al Qaeda, and that the proper approach was to let the United Nations handle it.  Well, Iran is acquiring WMDs, has ties to Al Qaeda and other terrorists, and the United Nations -- while deserving credit for honestly confronting the problem -- has thusfar failed.

So the left is ready to endorse a war with Iran, right?  Of course not, but not without reason (a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of bad foreign policy).  This is a real mess with no good alternatives.  Try to engage the theocratic dictatorship?  How effective is that going to be?  (See: North Korea)  Continue supporting the pro-democracy movement?  Yes, but Iran will have nukes long before there's any regime change.   Do nothing and live with a nuclear Iran?  Some might prefer this as the lesser of all evils.  I don't, but more importantly it may be irrelevant: Israel vows not to let it happen.  Back in 1981 letting Israel do our realpolitik dirty work made sense, but not today.  The 9/11 Commission report notes the obvious effect of U.S. support for Israel on Arab/Muslim support for terrorists.  Imagine what an Israeli-Iranian hot war would do.  This appears to be the Council of Foreign Relation's greatest fear, but their admittedly iffy cautious-engagement-with-Iran plan isn't better. 

Regardless, an eventual Israeli action is looking more and more likely -- I suspect it's even Dubya's fallback position -- so we should get ready.  Do what you can through the U.N. to slow Iran (but don't sell the farm to China and Russia to get their support).  Try to delay Israel for as long as possible.  But if it comes down to an Israeli strike, we have to go beyond a fake show of outrage.  Decisively, force major concessions regarding the occupation, with some near-immediate deadlines.  Not great, but it's better than reading some future commission's report that "the dirty bomb was made in Iran."

Name: Robert Mackey
Hometown: New York, NY
Eric -
One thing that seems to have escaped notice so far in the Koppel interview with Springsteen last night is an edit in the tape I (as a former editor of television news pieces for AP) spotted that may well have grossly distorted his statement of support for Kerry and Edwards into a negative statement about them. 

I've written it up on my blog but in a nutshell it seems to me pretty clear that an edit was made in what I took to be the middle of Springsteen repeating in the interview a statement of support for Kerry and Edwards he made in his Op-Ed piece that had a three-part logic, which was basically that 'Kerry and Edwards don't have all the answers, but they ask the right questions, and that'd be a big improvement over what we've got now.' 

I read the Op-Ed online last night before watching the interview and noticed that Springsteen was sticking very close to his own carefully chosen words from the editorial while speaking to Koppel - in several cases saying the same things verbatim and often using the same logic and slightly different words.  When it came to the question of endorsing an alternative to Bush, Springsteen said this in his Op-Ed"

I don't think John Kerry and John Edwards have all the answers.  I do believe they are sincerely interested in asking the right questions and working their way toward honest solutions.  They understand that we need an administration that places a priority on fairness, curiosity, openness, humility, concern for all America's citizens, courage and faith.-

And then this in the interview with Koppel:

We were mislead into the Vietnam war, you know, it's not just a purely Democratic and Republican issue.
...
But what I do believe, is I believe that John Kerry and John Edwards - I don't think they have all the answers, right now, for all the problems we have out there, I haven't seen anybody who does, you know-

And then right at that point there was a video edit - which you can see because the visual switched from a close-up of Springsteen talking, with his head up, to a wider shot of him, with his head cocked to the side and on his hand, listening to Koppel asking a question.

Now Springsteen is something of a video editor's dream, since he speaks with lots of slow deliberative pauses in between his phrases, so it is relatively easy to cut away from what he is saying in the middle of a thought without making it obvious that he's been cut off in mid-rhetorical flight.  I think this may well have happened here.  The video evidence shows that it is clear that an edit of some sort was made here - and the logical construction of his thought in the Op-Ed implies that he was in the middle of making the same point to Koppel when the editor chopped out the rest of his statement to make the dialogue seem snappier on TV than it was in reality.  But notice that, if this edit did elide the rest of Springsteen's statement, what it does to the logic.  This statement goes from being the first third of an endorsement of Kerry and Edwards into baldly negative statement that 'I don't think they have all the answers'. 

And that's what was broadcast around the country!

At the very least someone should ask Koppel (or Springsteen) what was cut out here.  And if the edit did change the meaning of what Springsteen said, Koppel should be forced to apologize.

Name: Paul
Hometown: Boston
Here's one, of I'm sure many, conservatives who will never buy another CD or concert ticket to see Bruce Springsteen (or Mellencamp - another favorite until his rant with Whoopi).  I respect their views, passion and politics.  But once you put yourself out there don't complain when the backlash happens.  We have beliefs too.  And I believe he's alienated a big chunk of his fan base with this naked partisan push.  As has Mellencamp.

Name: Marcus Wilson
Hometown: Pittsburgh, PA.
Ralph Nader was on the Diane Rehm show today.  It was the most disingenuous performance I have ever heard.  He ticks off the sound bites that resonate with progressives, but does so with absolutely no feeling.  It is, by definition, nonsensical to try to psychoanalyze someone you have never met.  Yet the only thing that resonates when you listen to him and the only thing that generates any true emotion for him is complaining about the Democrats.  Otherwise, it is blah (corporate ownership of the two parties), blah (no regard for poor people), blah (the absurdity of our health care system), blah (our ugly foreign policy), blah (corporate crime). Nader ticks them off his mental checklist like a professor bored with a class he has taught for many years.  The only true bitching is when he talks about the Democrats keeping him off the ballot.  This, to him, is the death of democracy.

I just wish people would stop begging him to drop out for the good of the country; the guy is really not interested.  I also wish people would stop telling him what a great man he is and all the good things he has done for the country.  Nader has become a hateful person that, except for trying to pander for votes, appears to care nothing about the corporate ownership of both parties, poor people, the absurdity of our health care system, our ugly foreign policy and corporate crime. 

Whatever Nader used to be, people need to deal with what he has become.  An old, vindictive and sad, sad man.

Name: Greg Costello
Hometown: Dallas, TX
Hey Eric: Just thought I'd write and let you know, even though I decided long ago, that I'll be voting for Kerry instead of Nader for the first time ever.

I voted for Ralph in '96 because I knew that Clinton was an easy win, especially in what was then my home state, New York.  As a Brooklyn resident, I voted for him in 2000 because I knew Al Gore would take New York.  I was (I believe understandably) upset at the Democratic candidates' moderation, and wanted to cast my vote, as long as it didn't "really matter," for what I thought was a truly liberal candidate.

Now, I live in Texas, where I know that Kerry stands little chance of a victory.  But I refuse to vote for Ralph.  Why?  Well, it's partly due to what my favorite MSNBC.com blogger has revealed to me about the anti-Corvair one.

But, you know, despite the fact that Kerry is moderating his views like every candidate does in the late summer of an election year, I wouldn't vote for anyone but him.  Hey, next to Dubya, Kerry looks like Eugene V. Debs.  I'll proudly vote for him, hoping that, while he probably won't win Texas, I'll at least be contributing to the popular vote of a real candidate.

Name:  Robert P. Ewing
Hometown: Paoli, Pennsylvania
In the 8/5/04 Washington Post, an article by Josh White reports that a sergeant testifying in the L. England court martial stated that there were reported instances in which the doors of prisoners in Abu Ghraib were posted with the code "Article 134" as a signal that the prisoners within should be concealed from the International Red Cross ("IRC").  The sergeant indicated he did not know the derivation of the Article 134 reference, and the Josh White article does not provide any guidance in that regard.

Not being a Bush Administration confidante (thankfully, for my soul!), I cannot be certain, but I believe that the signal in question is a reference to Article 134 of the so-called Lieber Code, which was prepared by Francis Lieber, and issued as General Orders No. 100 by President Lincoln on April 24, 1863.

The Lieber Code (which can be reviewed in its entirety on a number of Web sites) has no force or effect under United States or international law, and has clearly been surpassed as a matter of the fundamental humanity of its provisions by such modern "codes of war" as the Geneva Convention.  The text of the indicated article is as follows:

Article 134. The commander of an occupying army may require of the civil officers of the enemy, and of its citizens, any pledge he may consider necessary for the safety or
security of his army, and upon their failure to give it he may arrest, confine, or detain them.

My belief that Article 134 of the Lieber Code is the source of the Abu Ghraib signal has two foundations:  (1) I have been unable to find a provision of any U.S. statute or regulation or international convention or treaty which even gets close to making sense as the source of the reference; and, (2) I have a fairly clear recollection, that at the time the concealment of prisoners from the IRC first came to public attention, Donald Rumsfeld or some Pentagon or White House spokesperson (or both) made comments to the effect that such concealment could be justified if the prisoners had not cooperated in such a way as to assure security.  I suppose the indicated comments were a veiled and misleading reference to the fact that the unlucky, ghost prisoners had failed to obtain a satisfactory pledge (no doubt written, so that it could be used to "turn" the prisoners) of the safety and security of U.S. or coalition forces.

No such precondition to IRC access exists in contemporary law.  But given the prior "torturing" of the law concerning prisoner treatment which has been engaged in by the Bush Administration (e.g., the Alberto Gonzales and Jay Bybee memos - - torture is OK if the President says so), I would not be surprised if someone "cooked the books" on this issue also. 

It should be kept in mind  that the Lieber Code "pledge" discussion falls within a subsection headed "Parole," and should properly be considered as a part of the overall provisions concerning the now quaint custom of letting prisoners be repatriated during a time of war based on the pledge not to become reinvolved in the conflict being fought.  It makes sense that a government would have the right not to release a soldier to his home country if the soldier refuses to give such a pledge.  The Lieber Code article, however, gives no justification for refusing to give the IRC access to prisoners - - it is simply irrelevant to the issue - - except in the fevered minds of Bush Administration lawyers.

Dear Editor,
The World Food Programme is struggling to get food to more than a million people driven from their homes by the Darfur crisis. Continuing danger, impassable roads and torrential rains are not making our task any easier.  Of the $195 million we need for Darfur, we have received just $79 million:  roughly 40 percent.

If you are listing organizations to which your readers can donate, please include the following links for online contributions and a source of further information on the unfolding crisis.

Every dollar counts in this race against time and cruelty.

1. Donate Online
2. Darfur Crisis

Name: Barry Ritholtz
Hometown: The Big Picture
Hey Doc,
For Slacker Friday, I put together some permanent resources on Polling Data, as well as reference a few recent polls: These resources should be of interest and use for anyone following the election.

Presidential Polling Data Resources (all the President's Polls)  (mirror)

While the polls bounce around, I've discovered a few sites with permanent links to consistently informative data. These pages have distinguished themselves:

1. Electoral-Vote.com:  Simply a graphic depiction of these here United States, with polling data broken down by states and their electoral votes. See this chart as an example.
   
   The Electoral Vote Predictor right now shows Kerry at 280, and Bush at 258. These numbers fluctuate quite frequently as Florida and Ohio vacillates between "Barely Kerry" and "Barely Bush."
   
   
2. Professor Pollkatz's:  The good prof has a terrific, meticulous scatter chart of ALL the polling data.  It's never the single data point, and always the trend that matters most.
   
   See also the Professor's analysis of which pollsters have the greatest "Fudge Factors."
   
   
3. Polling Report:  Bills itself as "an independent, nonpartisan resource on trends in American public opinion."  I think that's a good description.  There's a wealth of data here that is simply very accessible and quite usable.
   
   Be sure to check out their National Barometer Trend Lines also.

There are only two mainstream media sites included here: The Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal.

• Washington Post has a permanent link that tracks a variety of issues, as well as providing detailed data of their methodology.
  
  See also this link for their recent graph.
  
  
• The WSJ gets included, despite having a not quite permanent link. Terrific perspective and charts on the Battleground Swing States. There’s some more commentary on the post convention Journal report here.

• August 5, 2004 | 1:12 PM ET

All Bruce, All the Time:
Will wonders never cease?  Twenty-five years ago, Bruce Springsteen made his first foray into politics by agreeing to play the now famed “No-Nukes” shows, produced by our main man Danny Goldberg, at which he introduced the song “The River,” dedicated to his sister, and acted badly toward his ex-girlfriend, but said not a word about nuclear power or anything else.  In the show’s program, most of the artists made some kind of statement about the horrors of nuclear energy or the “warm power of the sun” as Orleans used to sing, but not Bruce.  He just had a photo.

The one time I met Bruce, in the Green Room of the Charlie Rose show in 1999, Jon Landau introduced me as “that political writer whose stuff we are always talking about,” or something like that.  I didn’t believe it then and I don’t believe it now, but I do think that Bruce has been reading the right stuff—if endorsing the wrong books in concert—and has grown increasingly self-confident about the relationship between his cultural power and the responsibilities this conveys.  The Nightline interview and today’s Times Op-Ed certainly convey this confidence as well as the intense patriotism that burns inside the man.  I find it enormously touching that Bruce has decided to put his credibility on the line, no doubt infuriating a significant portion of his fan base, because of the responsibility he feels for the future of the country and the fact that he can do something important to help save it. 

And further in the wonders-never-cease department, he’s given what I think is his first ever interview to Backstreets, the magazine for Springsteen obsessives even more obsessive than yours truly.  In the meantime, don’t you think it’s time you bought the book?  (And could somebody punch out that Steve Alter fellow if you see him?)

Quote of the Day, Guess Who:

Like many others, in the aftermath of 9/11, I felt the country's unity.  I don't remember anything quite like it.  I supported the decision to enter Afghanistan and I hoped that the seriousness of the times would bring forth strength, humility and wisdom in our leaders.  Instead, we dived headlong into an unnecessary war in Iraq, offering up the lives of our young men and women under circumstances that are now discredited.  We ran record deficits, while simultaneously cutting and squeezing services like afterschool programs. We granted tax cuts to the richest 1 percent (corporate bigwigs, well-to-do guitar players), increasing the division of wealth that threatens to destroy our social contract with one another and render mute the promise of "one nation indivisible."

Quote of the Day, II, Republican consultant Mark McKinnon:  "We think it's unfortunate these particular fine musicians have decided to affiliate with a hate-filled fringe group like MoveOn.''

More Bruce:  A friend writes:

Yes, Ted Koppel `fessed up at the outset of last night’s “Nightline” that he knew next to nothing about pop music, but that still didn’t excuse the fact his interview with Bruce Springsteen was an underwhelming wonder.  I mean, couldn’t ABC have sent somebody to interview Springsteen about the upcoming Vote For Change Tour who actually knew what the singer was talking about when he referred to the political nature of “American Skin.”

“Nightline’s” bigger blunder though, was the set-up piece about today's cultural wars and how entertainers this year are playing an unusually aggressive role in the election.  But instead of playing it straight, and reporting the obvious fact that the cultural left is absolutely dominating that debate (i.e. “Fahrenheit 9/11”), “Nightline’s” Michelle Martin reported that most of the political activity “seems” to becoming from the left.  Seems?  Let's see, on the left there’s the unprecedented Vote For Change Tour featuring Springsteen, Pearl Jam, the Dave Matthews Band, Bonnie Raitt, Babyface, R.E.M., John Mellencamp, Jackson Brown, James Taylor, and John Fogerty.  It’s a lineup that represents some of the biggest names in pop music over the last quarter-of-a-century, and one that, collectively, has sold at least 300 million albums.  Who did ABC feature as artists on the right as a counterbalance?  Toby Keith and Wayne Newton.  Still desperate to fill out a conservative roster of stars to support its theory that the pop cultural wars are running hot in both directions, ABC propped up talking heads Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity as Republicans ‘entertainers.’  Another example of the press bending over backwards to make conservatives feel good. 

Have you bought the book yet?

In other news...

We will be welcomed as liberators.

U.S. to AIDS sufferers in Africa:  Drop dead.

Slate’s Jack Shafer thinks Rupert Murdoch “a bit of a hero” and Ben Bagdikian a chump.  That tells me all I really need to know about a person.  (Disclosure: I blurbed the book, and admire, but barely know, its author.)

Reading assignments from The New York Review:

• Garry Wills on Clinton.
  
  
• Ronald Dworkin on civil liberties.  
  
  
• More on Darfur.

In Memoriam:

1. Henri Cartier-Bresson
   
   
2. Sidney Morgenbesser
   
   
3. Bob Murphy

Alter-Review:  My favorite new book series, not including the Library of America’s IB Singer releases is the New York Review’s children's series.  We are currently in the middle of The Magic Pudding, accurately described as “one of the craziest books ever written for young readers."  So far our favorite is Jenny and the Cat Club, a collection of favorite stories about the cat, Jenny Linsky, and her club, written and illustrated by Esther Averill, of whom we’ve never heard—as with just about all of these authors—but whose acquaintances we are thrilled to make.  It’s almost enough to make a six-year-old forget entirely about “Walter the Farting Dog.”  Felicitations to the people in charge of picking and producing these.  They will rest on kids’ shelves, I feel certain, for generations to come.

Correspondents’ Corner:

Name: Barry Ritholtz
Hometown: The Big Picture
Hey Doc,
Here's one of those great moments where technology and culture and politics all intersect:  You can download any of the speeches from the DNC for free on Apple's iTunes.  Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Al Sharpton, Jimmy Carter, Ron Reagan, and of course, John Edwards and John Kerry -- all available in MP3 format.

A GOP version is coming in September, post convention.

You can also access any of the "9-11 Commission" testimony -- Condi Rice, Richard Clark, George Tenet -- pretty much everyone --except, for some unknown reason, George Bush and Dick Cheney.  That seems to be missing.

Fascinating stuff, this technology thing.

iTunes gets Political  (mirror)

Apple's iTunes has a very cool free offer:  Any of the speeches from the Democratic Convention, the Republican Convention, or the 9/11 National Commission on Terrorist Attacks are available for free at the iTunes music store. (Note: you must have iTunes installed -- Mac or Windows -- for this to work!)

You can either launch iTunes, select Music Store, and then enter a search for "9-11 Commission" or "Democratic Convention" to bring up a list of selections . . .  or, just click below:

• Democratic Convention
• National Commission on Terrorist Attacks

NOTE:  This link takes you to the downloadable version of the full 9-11 commission book.  To access the testimony before the commission (for free), simply search for "9-11 Commission."

Name: Greg Roach
Hometown: roachblog.blogspot.com
Dr. A-
A little told tale is the percentage of the troops fighting in Iraq that are National Guard and Reservists.  It was 25% during "major combat operations."  Currently it is 39%.

However on July 7, the Director of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lt. Gen. Norton Schwartz, told Congress that in 2005 he expects non-regular military to reach 43% of all troops in Iraq. (Source: AP)

Almost half of the boots on the ground will be weekend warriors!!!  As John Kerry said at the convention, it's a backdoor draft.

Name: Reed Richardson
Hometown: New York City
Re: Tim Bray & Electoral-vote.com
Dr. E,
Another similar Web site to Electoral-vote.com is from the LA Times, the link is here.  It sometimes doesn't have the most up-to-date polling data but it does allow you to "give" states to either candidate and play around with a numerous electoral college scenarios.  One the most chilling is if Bush wins the same states this year as in 2000 except for West Virginia and New Hampshire, (WV & NH are trending toward Kerry in the latest Zogby poll) In that case, there would be an electoral college tie at 269, virtually assuring a Bush victory in the House despite a good probability that he would have lost the popular vote yet again.

Name: Stephen Anderson
Hometown: Los Angeles
Hi Eric,
Re: Sal's wonderful review of The Faces, and his comment about Rod Stewart: "It'll make you feel better knowing that Rod Stewart didn't always sing 'It Had To Be You' for a living," there is other supporting evidence for this.

The first time many of us ever heard of Rod was when Jeff Beck's first album "Truth" was released in the summer of '68.  I bought the album the day it came out and saw them that night here in L.A. at the Shrine Auditorium, and the star of the show was Rod.  Hadn't heard a voice like that before, never saw anyone look quite like that before.  Along with Mickey Waller on drums and some kid named Ronnie Wood on bass, they tore the roof off the place, playing with a fun and testosterone-filled hubris that was intoxicating.

I saw them twice that summer, both shows were fantastic.  FYI, 2nd time was an "All British Night": Jeff Beck, Moody Blues, and Ten Years After, all for $2.50.

Rod did 2 albums with Beck.  The 2nd, Beck-Ola, has just been remastered and re-released by EMI.  See JeffBeck.com (scroll down) for details.  The first Rod Stewart solo album in '70 sort of set the stage for the Faces work to follow by being more song oriented and less guitar-hero flashy.

• August 4, 2004 | 12:05 PM ET

Come Back Afterward:
Um, I don’t really know what to add to this, so let’s just get the big news out of the way.  You can see Bruce, Fogerty, and REM, and help save the country and many parts of the world at the same time if you live near or travel to: Philadelphia, Cleveland, Ann Arbor, St. Paul or Orlando. You can also see Bonnie, Jackson, Mellencamp, the Dixie Chicks, an apologetic Pearl Jam, James Taylor and some other people.  Go here, but come back.  (Personally, we at Altercation were tentatively scheduled to give a talk in Amsterdam on October 1, but we are more than happy to change plans and arrange to be in Philly instead in exchange for a pair of tickets.  We’ll even pay for them…) 

Misleading America: More Evidence
In a new cover story for In These Times, Progress Report writers David Sirota and Christy Harvey definitively prove the Bush administration knew well-before the war that it was deliberately misleading America about the Iraqi “threat.”  The article chronologically juxtaposes pre-war intelligence documents with the administration’s pre-war statements to show that on each major charge, the Bush team ignored warnings that its case for war was weak. This is the definitive, open-and-shut case that it was the White House – not the intelligence community – that misled America to war.

In it they demonstrate:

1. Well before they made their declarations that Iraq had nuclear weapons, the Bush administration's own intelligence agencies, the IAEA and others warned the White House that the claim could not be substantiated.  Nonetheless, President Bush and Vice President Cheney proceeded to repeatedly claim Iraq had nuclear weapons.
   
   
2. Before they made their claims that Iraq "possesses" chemical and biological weapons, the Pentagon's intelligence agency told the White House the claim could not be supported, and the State Department's intelligence experts told Colin Powell not to make the claim in his key speech to the U.N. They ignored the warnings.
   
   
3. A month after top members of Bush's own party, including Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), admitted there was no intelligence proving an Iraq-al Qaeda connection, President Bush began telling the country that "you can't distinguish between Saddam and al Qaeda."  He and other officials proceeded to ignore key warnings from terrorism and intelligence experts that there was no connection, and continued to assert there was.  Vice President Cheney, when called onto the carpet, even began referring to documents previously discredited by the Pentagon to claim his Iraq-al Qaeda assertions were accurate.  Even today, after the 9/11 Commission has definitively shown there was "no credible evidence" of an Iraq-al Qaeda collaboration, the administration continues to assert there is "overwhelming evidence" proving their case.  They have provided no evidence.

See the Progress Report for follow-ups.

Does God Live in my IPOD?  Well, he/she/it is everywhere, no?  I have 7,065 songs in my IPOD, which I only use as a kind of personal radio, set on random play.  Yesterday while I was in synagogue, waiting for the kid to finish her art class, I was reading and listening first to the Johnny Cash/Joe Strummer duet on “Redemption Song.”  A little while later, Rosanne came on singing, “What would I give to be diamond in your eyes again?”  I thought: How weird, Rosanne has one of the most beautifully pristine voices of all time—angelic, actually—while Johnny’s comes from somewhere beneath the surface of the earth, a world away.  They are so far apart and yet they came from the same place.  How did that happen?  I have no idea, but the next song that came on was “My Sweet Lord.” Does this mean I have to become a Lubuvitcher?  A Hare Krishna?  Well, if I do believe in God, and sometimes I do, I believe in the God of Johnny Cash (at least insofar as one can and still be a Jew).

Harold Meyerson asks, “Where's Rummy?”

Edward Said’s final essay according to the Guardian.

Tony Kushner imagines Laura Bush, (again) here.

Bruce is on Nightline tonight. An interesting step in his political evolution. In the past he has always let the music do the talking. But Bush is a uniter…

Speaking of which, sometimes Iraq is like Vietnam, sometimes it’s like Lebanon (and sometimes it’s like the Soviets in Afghanistan).  One way it is like Vietnam is that the business community has turned against it—and Bush—and this could be the crucial factor in ending it.  This Wall Street Journal story is significant for that reason.  Here’s the list.

Alter-reviews:
Sal’s just seen a Faces box.  (He goes a mite overboard, methinks, but stay with him….)

Faces:  Five Guys Walk Into a Bar

It seems that everyone who has heard this boxed set has the same thing to say. "This is the best boxed set ever!"  And you know, it may be!  With only 4 albums to their credit, and about as many hit singles, The Faces didn't have the impact on the world that the Rolling Stones had.  But in many ways they were better.  Much better.  They were passionate and unpretentious.  They had fun playing-something that seems to be missing from so many bands these days.  They played music that made you want to play music!

Another important fact about this set, is that keyboardist Ian McLagan compiled it the way a music lover would compile a mixtape for a friend.  He didn't just piece song after song in chronological order.  He didn't throw all the obscurities onto one CD.  That would have been a tedious listen.  He hadn't heard the songs in such a long time, that while listening to each one another popped to mind, and before you know it, he couldn't stop!  He wanted to impress the fans.  This is exactly the feeling you get while listening.  It's so damn good, you just can't take it off!

Album tracks mixed with b-sides, followed by live tracks mixed with BBC performances, right back into hits and album tracks, each disc is a coherent representation of five guys doing what they do best!  The Faces could play the blues. (Check out "Love In Vain.")  They could play R&B.  (Check out their cover of The Temptations', "I Wish It Would Rain.")  They could play kick-ass rock n roll.  (Check out 40 of the 67 tracks on the box!)  There isn't a boring second on any of the 4 discs!

Ron Wood, the late Ronnie Lane, Ian McLagan, Kenny Jones, and the young, electric Rod Stewart, created music that exemplified the rock n roll myth.

I talked with McLagan right about the time he started sifting through tapes for this set. He asked me, "Do you think it will sell?"  I said, "I'll buy one."  He laughed and said, "Excellent. I'll proceed."  Thankfully, he did.  Buy this!  It'll make you feel better knowing that Rod Stewart didn't always sing "It Had To Be You" for a living.

--Sal Nunziato, NYCD

Correspondents’ Corner:

Name: Bob Yates
Hometown: Warrensburg, MO
Dear Eric,
A transcript of the Stewart-Bonilla exchange can be found here.

It is clear to me that increasingly the "serious" news shows are all fake.  At least, Jon Stewart acknowledges that his is a real fake news show.

On Monday night, he committed real journalism.

Name: Tim Bray
Hometown: Vancouver, BC
For day-to-day tracking of the horse race at the level where it matters (Electoral College votes), check out Electoral-vote.com, it's insanely useful (and an unpaid labor of love for what that's worth).

Name: Bob Mangino
Hometown: Seattle
Eric,
RE: Sharpton
I say we "use" him to deliver some votes, encourage more black activism, and hammer Bush the way the GOP is using Nader to siphon off some would-be Democrat votes.  I don't think anybody at the DNC harbors illusions about his past or usefulness now.  That includes Al.

I'm a pragmatist.  I hold my nose and take my medicine if I want things to get better.

• August 3, 2004 | 10:41 AM ET

One of the many, many reasons we are no safer today than on September 10, 2001 is the fact that the administration has proven so willing to hype non-existent threats.  It has demonstrated its lack of credibility in doing so and left sensible people no reason to take them seriously anymore, even in the case of a genuine threat, should there be one.

Could an al-Qaida terrorist ask for more?  (Well, yes, how about an invasion of an Arab country that inspires recruits and leaves a terrorist-haven in its wake?  And how about letting the Taliban reconstitute itself and Al-Qaida regroup on the Pakistani border?  And how about letting bin Laden get away at Tora Bora?  And how about treating homeland security as a pork-barrel issue that leaves our ports as well as our chemical and nuclear facilities all but unguarded?  I could, um, go on and I do.

Speaking of Afghanistan, Time reports that

U.S. forces on the trail of Osama bin Laden and the leaders of the Taliban in late 2001 didn’t worry much about elderly, pious-looking men like Haji Juma Khan, TIME’s Islamabad bureau chief Tim McGirk reports. A towering tribesman from the Baluchistan desert near Pakistan, Khan was picked up that December near Kandahar and taken into U.S. custody.  Though known to U.S. and Afghan officials as a drug trafficker, he seemed an insignificant catch. “At the time, the Americans were only interested in catching bin Laden and [Taliban leader] Mullah Omar,” says a European counterterrorism expert in Kabul. “Juma Khan walked.”  

That decision has come back to haunt the U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan.  Western intelligence agencies believe Khan has become the kingpin of a heroin-trafficking enterprise that is a principal source of funding for the Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists. A Western law-enforcement official in Kabul who is tracking Khan says agents in Pakistan and Afghanistan, after a tip-off in May, turned up evidence that Khan is employing a fleet of cargo ships to move Afghan heroin out of the Pakistani port of Karachi.  The official says at least three vessels on return trips from the Middle East took arms like plastic explosives and antitank mines, which were secretly unloaded in Karachi and shipped overland to al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters.

Quote of the Day, Bob Weir, onstage in Florida: (from a reader)  "If just half the Heads in Florida voted in 2000" we wouldn't be in this mess.  I can't tell you who to vote for, but don't vote for Nader.  I know him and he's an as**ole."

Alter-review, “new” music wrap up

Music discoveries: Marc Broussard’s new CD, “Carencro” on Island, comes with reviews that make it appear as if he were the Springsteen of R & B singers.  You may feel differently but I’m not really buying.  I found it pleasant but not that interesting.  Perhaps it’s a live thing, like the early you-know who.  When I put on John Brannen’s “The Good Thief,” on Sly Dog Records, however, I had to check to see if I remember which guy was supposed to be the new Bruce.  The lyrics are smart and sometimes deep, sometimes poetic.  The presentation is pretty and doesn’t get in the way.  And the music, well, I’m not good at describing this kind of thing but I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.  Read about him here. 

Then again, if you don’t know whether you can trust me, then it’s time to finally go out and buy this incredible new CD by Ricky Fante, appropriately called “Rewind.”  There’s been some bad ink about Fante because he appears to have borrowed a little too heavily from his forebearers and some legal complications cropped up, and may have delayed this incredible record’s release.  Now that it’s out, it ought to be a revelation to anybody who thinks music never got any better than the heyday of the Stax/Volt years.  I won’t make any grand claims for the young man vis-à-vis the likes of Otis Redding or Al Green.  But I will say that the only soul album that sounded anything like this in the remotely recent past was Terrance Trent D’Arby’s first and that turned out to be a moment of genius that never reproduced itself.  Get ahold of this CD and root for this young man.  It grabs you, as the saying goes, right from the first note and never lets you go.  More here.

I’m also excited by the newest release from the never-let-you-down, Drive-By–Truckers called “Tales of The Dirty South,” on New West.  These Alabaman boys are so funny and so smart and so original that it’s almost proof that there’s no God that more people will pay money to see a Skynyrd tribute band than this incredibly vital, intelligent and authentic music.  Wonderful cover art, too.  Check ‘em out here.

If for some reason, your collection lacks the great and not-so great Stones albums from “Exile” through “Undercover of the Night,” or if you just want to own their the singles and nothing else, they’ve been remastered on the collection “Jump Back” using 20 bit technology, but not, lest you be confused, to play as SACDs, as with the rest of the catalogue.  Don’t ask me why, but I’m sure there’s some record company reason.  Anyway, I know what it is, but I like it. 

And finally, praise the lord, there’s a wonderful new four-CD Al Green  box set.  I liked that old white box set, which had very pretty packaging.  The new one, “The Immortal Soul of Al Green” from Right Stuff Records, one of my favorite new discoveries, is not quite as handsome but is, in many ways, more useful.  Sal will tell you why, in a few days, though.  In the meantime it’s got 24 bit remastering, from the original Hi Records analog tapes and a 56 page booklet and it sounds wonderful, with lots of gems I’ve never heard before.

Correspondents’ Corner:

Name: Phil Obbard
Hometown: Brooklyn, NY
Hi Eric,
I hope you did not miss the masterful performance by Jon Stewart tonight (Monday) - he positively pummeled Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) on this oft-repeated, never-sourced bit about Kerry being the "#1 liberal" and John Edwards as the "#4 liberal" in the Senate.  It was a jaw-dropping performance as Stewart gradually chipped away at Bonilla's talking points and finally got him to concede the argument.  One of the finest moments of political journalism I have ever seen, and it was hidden away on basic cable at 11:20 at night.  A damn shame, but an amazing performance.

If you missed it, it's worth seeking out.

Name: Jen Sorensen
Hometown: Charlottesville, VA
Dear Eric,
A Nader cartoon you may enjoy.

The starry-eyed Nader Youth are petitioning here in Charlottesville, VA, asking people to sign up if they support Nader's "right" to be on the ballot, exactly as reported in the NY Times article.  Doubly depressing, considering Kerry is trying to put Virginia into play.  (We did manage to elect Democrat Mark Warner governor somehow.)

Name: Mike Mejia
Hometown: Atlanta, GA
Eric,
I know you are not a big fan of Noam Chomsky, but I interpret this quote from a recent interview Noam did on Alternative Radio as a repudiation of the Nader candidacy (although Nader is not mentioned by name).

Anyone who says, 'I don't care if Bush gets elected' is basically telling poor and working people in the country, 'I don't care if your lives are destroyed.  I don't care if you can have a little money to help your disabled mother.  I just don't care because from my elevated point of view, I don't see much difference between them (Bush and Kerry).'

That's a way of saying, 'Pay no attention to me because I don't care about you.'

Apart from its being wrong, it's also a recipe for disaster if you're hoping to ever develop popular movements and a political alternative.

Name: Ned Fagan
Hometown: River Falls
Dear Eric.
I read you all the time. You are the voice of truth for me. Thank you.

Regarding Rev. Al: (Mon. Aug. 2) I think you are being too hard on him.  I am happy to accept his good actions in the now.  I am willing to let the past remain in the past, and I must say that there was bad behavior on both sides, both Rev. Al and the forces of the criminal justice system.

Your comparison between U.S. post-war complicity with Nazi officials and current acceptance of Al Sharpton (acknowledging that you explicitly did not compare Sharpton to the Nazis) is defective.  The U.S. hid the identity of certain ex-Nazis, and certainly conspired to help them avoid punishment.  Nothing of the sort has or is being done regarding Sharpton.  Rev. Al is seen to be the owner of his past conduct.  That makes all the difference, IMO.

With this in mind, I encourage you to "take yes for an answer."  The Rev. Al Sharpton has spoken forcefully and convincingly of the sins of Bush & Co.  He is helping to put responsibility for certain defects of government where it belongs.  Let's be friendly to our friends!!!

Name: Alice Marshall
Hometown: Fairfax, VA
What to do about Sharpton?  Exactly what we do about Nader, point out his obvious ties to Republicans.

Salon had an article about how a well known Republican consultant was running Sharpton's campaign.  Probably could find some well known Republican contributors if we looked at his filings.  Who circulated Sharpton's petitions, that sort of thing.  Just poke around and something is sure to turn up on a man like Sharpton.

But you know, I think the Republicans are beginning to wonder if they haven't created a Frankenstein in Sharpton.  Sharpton ain't no Nader.  ;-)

• August 2, 2004 | 12:20 PM ET

Newsweek’s B.S. on the “Bounce”
How silly/irresponsible is Newsweek?  Its reporters write,

Coming out of the Democratic National Convention in Boston, Sen. John Kerry now holds a seven-point lead over President George W. Bush (49 percent to 42 percent) in a three-way race with independent Ralph Nader (3 percent), according to the latest NEWSWEEK poll.  The poll was taken over two nights, both before and after Kerry's acceptance speech. Respondents who were queried after Kerry's Thursday night speech gave the Democrat a ten-point lead over Bush.

They go on to say,

Kerry’s four-point “bounce” is the smallest in the history of the NEWSWEEK poll. There are several factors that may have contributed to the limited surge, including the timing of the poll.
...
On Thursday, Kerry had just a two-point lead over Bush (47 percent to 45 percent), suggesting that his Friday night speech had a significant impact.

Hello, just how in the world do you expect to measure a “bounce” if you do half of your poll before the candidate makes his speech?  The story is false advertising, pure and simple; intellectually indefensible and evidence for those who see a conspiracy within the mainstream media to undermine the Democrats, as took place in many cases in 2000.  Really, it is so obvious—measure the “bounce” after, not before the speech--that one wonders just how in the world Newsweek thought they could get away with it.  And if you see any pundits using these phony numbers, you’ll know they are either lazy or Republican-biased.  Shame on everyone involved.

Second, bounce or no bounce the convention was terrific news for Kerry.  This election will be a referendum on the incumbent.  Going into it, Kerry was way behind in all “leadership” and “national security” categories.  Now he’s just about even.  In other words, he’s exactly where he wants to be when people decide they’ve had enough of the current guy but need to be reassured about the other guy.  I have always suspected that this was the underlying r’aison d’etre of the otherwise lackluster Kerry campaign but I’m pleased to see my suspicions confirmed.

More on Boston:

Dean:
If Ralph Nader had Howard Dean’s guts and grace, America would be a different country today.  Dean, a formerly moderate-to-conservative Democrat in many ways has been transformed by his incredible experience into a progressive leader and organizer.  He is dong just what Nader should have done—and would have done if he genuinely cared about the causes for which he professes to stand—which is to reinvigorate the Democratic party with an infusion of new, young blood and help train it, direct and eventually organize it into a new progressive voice inside the party. 

The model of course, is Ralph Reed and it’s one that works, provided one undertakes it with sufficient patience and dedication.  I saw Dean speak to an overflow crowd—not the entire crowd, just the overflow part of the crowd who couldn’t get into his main speech—at an event sponsored by Campaign for America’s Future.  Everything he said was sensible, down-to–earth and yet hopeful and progressive at the same time. 

If Kerry does win and Dean and Trippi have (together with MoveOn and others) built up organizations strong enough to hold his proverbial feet to the fire then the primary process this year will have accomplished what it never has in the past—when progressive candidates like Jackson, Brown and others have raised millions of dollars and created waves of excitement only to disappear and leave the tough institution-building work to others.

Sharpton:
I did not see Al Sharpton’s speech when he gave it but I caught it on Saturday thanks to my friends at C-Span.  I don’t know what to do about Sharpton.  He is a truly awful man, who has never come clean about the reputations he’s ruined, the dissension he’s created and the lies he’s perpetrated in New York City, where his egomaniacal plotting have done much to set back the cause of race relations and of black equality.  On the other hand, he seems to be saying that if we agree to forget all that, he’ll use all of his considerable rhetorical and inspirational powers for good, for healing and for defeating the forces of evil of which he was so recently and intimately a part. 

It’s clear what the pragmatic thing to do is; ignore the evil of the past and let the man do the good he wants to do.  But does that make it right?  I really don’t know.  The United States justified the embrace of high-level Nazis on the basis of this kind of logic and I’m not so crazy about that decision.  Now Sharpton’s not a Nazi, of course, but where’s the line?  The entire Tawana Brawley episode makes me sick, not least of which for the idealistic people he deliberately misled as well as the reputations of honest cops he sought to destroy.  I guess it’s fortunate that a) this isn’t up to me but to black people, and b) hello, the amazing and perhaps too-good-to-be-true Barack Obama just made Sharpton a lot less important.  In any case, watch the speech if you missed it.

Why did Kerry and all the Democrats ignore the Bush deficit?

The big Ronnie Dugger/Nation voting machine piece is finally out.  It’s here.  I’ve not read it yet. 

Sandy Berger is innocent. I’ll expect apologies in triplicate from all of the idiots who wrote me obscene attacks for waiting to hear what was really what with this strange story.  Anyway Nick Confessore has some thoughts about the anatomy of the smear here.

How many ways can we make the United States and the world a more dangerous place?  The Bush administration seems to want to count the ways.  More here.

How to mislead a great nation into war part xxxvii: Use discredited intelligence to make your case.  Never admit what you’re doing.

Could this kind of photo be the real reason Ralph Nader is seeking to spoil this year’s election, as he did four years ago?  If Nader were doing the world any genuine good this year, would he be booked on all of these programs?  Would Tim Russert give him the time of day?  Would the multi-millionaire be getting all this publicity for his new book?  Enjoy your tax breaks, Ralph.  You’ve earned them.  More Nader/traitor news here.

Quote Of the Day, from the above, "Ego?  I don't know the meaning of the term." 
--Ralph “Mephistopheles” Nader

Bruce corner, from Backstreets.com:

IF YOU BUILD IT, HE WILL COME
After a group of BTXers spent Saturday working in the sun, building a house as part of the Habitat for Humanity project on Freehold's E Street, they refueled at Federici's Pizza.  Vini Lopez came to have a few slices as well, and guess who else came to dinner?  You got it: Bruce Springsteen.  Bruce hung out and chatted with the BTX volunteers, asking more about the Habitat project, talking about the old times with Vini, and even taking care of the tip.  Read more and see pictures on the Loose Ends forum of BTX.
- August 1, 2004

In checking some of the posts of those who were with him at the pizza parlor, here are some highlights:

1. He confirmed there will be an announcement on Wednesday.  While he didn't spill the beans, he did say that Patti may be touring this fall, but not in October.
2. He was very impressed with Kerry's convention speech, and is OK with the campaign's use of No Surrender and LOHAD.
3. After toasting to a Kerry victory in November, Bruce talked about going to East Berlin in 1988 and being anonymous when he arrived, but then playing to on national television and to a crowd of 165,000 the next day.  He said he prefers fame over anonymity.

Correspondents Corner:

Name: Charles Pierce
Hometown: Newton, MA
Hey Doc:
Because every day, even a quieter Monday, is Slacker Friday, Part The XXXII.

Are you getting just the faintest whiff of Making The Best Of Things?  Pat Buchanan talks about the coming conservative crack-up, and your pal Andrew is really, really mad at his former hero, and David Brooks seems to be incoherently searching for His Own Personal John Kerry.  The air is alive with the scuttling of little rat-feet toward the gunwales right now.

Good.  Let them go.  The important thing is to let the whole thing fall and shatter, the way the R's did to the D's back in the 1980's.  (I think, one day, political historians are going to look at 9/11 much as they look now at Watergate -- a  huge and random event that briefly kept a rotting political party from collapsing from within.)  There should be none of this mushy-Joementum-centrism to help them survive.  Let them reconstitute themselves as a serious party for serious people -- Senator McCain?  Line five, please -- and let them divorce their fringe, on their own.  And do not let them make the country ungovernable, the way they did to Bill Clinton.  You want the January, 2005 game plan?  There it is.

Of course.  They could still win.  John Zogby be damned, my money's still in my pocket.

The nominees are not poets.  Clinton isn't one, either, by the way.  He's a master of emotional riffing, but, as a writer, he's always been vastly overrated.  The chin-music in the speech was purposeful and shrewd -- from "reporting for duty" to the ju-jitsu bit at the end about negative campaigning.  It solidified my own quirky impression of the ticket -- that the D's have nominated two terrific LAWYERS to make their case -- one a gifted prosecutor and the other a genius defense attorney.  I wouldn't want to be either a criminal defendant against Kerry, or a negligent corporate slug caught in Edwards's crosshairs.  It's like lining up against Jack McCoy and Atticus Finch simultaneously.  This is not a bad thing.  Americans love lawyers who WIN, no matter what side of the bar they're on.

Eric replies:  Speaking of our main man, Salon cornered Tucker Carlson on his morally disgusting use of “Jacuzzi lawyer.”  He has reason to regret this, here.

Name: Robert Drury
Hometown: Dubuque
I am a decorated Vietnam Veteran and support John Kerry.  That is not the important part of what happened Thursday Night at the DNC.  What happened is that for the first time since I returned from Vietnam in 1970 I saw 30 Vietnam Veterans standing proudly in front of a National Television audience supporting a candidate for President.

They were not afraid that their presence would dredge up old wounds from the past.  They were not afraid at all.  What I saw was my brothers in arms clear eyes, proud and unashamed.

I hid my medals for 25 years.  I hid the fact that I was a Vet for 18 years because I had been made to be ashamed of my service during that divisive war.

I am no longer ashamed that when my country called me I served and served well.  When I returned after 18 months in Vietnam I felt just like John Kerry did.  And as Max Cleland so profoundly put it in his introduction, "I found a friend."

What happened on that stage on Thursday night could have been the Democratic or the Republican Convention and I would have been just as proud.  It was a moment I will never forget as long as I live.

Thank you John Kerry, Max, and especially those wonderful "Band of Brothers" who stood on that stage.  They stood for me.  They stood for all the friends I lost in Vietnam, and they stood for all Vietnam Veterans:  Proud, unbowed and unashamed.

Name: Bill Manson
Hometown: Guelph, ON
The America Haters at New England Journal of Medicine give another reason to be concerned.

Name: Steve
Hometown: Philadelphia, PA
Eric,
Want more proof that Ralph Nader is fronting for Republicans?

I recently received an e-mail from a staunch Republican at the University of Pennsylvania.  To get Ralph on the ballot in Pennsylvania, the group he is affiliated with (he does not mention, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the RNC) is offering $1 per signature, re-imbursements for gas, and an overnight stay in a hotel in Harrisburg to deliver the signatures.  Sounds like a great deal!  Here is the text of the email:

It would seem that they are having some problems getting signatures to get Nader on the ballot up in Pennsylvania.  For those who are interested you can get $1 per signature on the petition... if you go to a food court at lunch you will get 500 in a few hours.  Please contact me ASAP if you are interested.  If you have to drive somewhere your gas and tolls it be reimbursed.  Also, if you want to go to Harrisburg and do it this weekend you will get free hotel.
...

Name: Mark McKee
Hometown: Albuquerque, NM
Dr. E,
OK, you win.  I'm dumping Nader. I thought it only fair that you should be the first to know.

Another a**hole for Kerry...

All the best.

Name: Star Lawrence
Hometown: Chandler AZ
One more thing.  I was shaking my head when Chris Matthews told Chris Heinz that he thought Teresa Heinz Kerry was sort of like coffee.  At first, Chris said, he didn't like coffee but could not live without it now.  To his credit Heinz just looked pleasantly puzzled.  I am sure he was thinking, "Shove it, blondie."

Seriously--what is up with Matthews?  Was he told to act as idiotically as possible or something?

Name: David Sobol
Hometown: New York, NY
Eric--
Please send me a link to a reputable charity I can donate to for the crisis in Sudan.  Such a link would be a welcome (and productive) general link on your site.

Eric replies:  My friend Samantha Power, who is just back from there on a reporting assignment, answers, “Your correspondent could spend money well by giving to International Rescue Committee.  They are doing amazing food and water work and will soon launch a protection program.”  You can read about their efforts here.

MORE FROM COMMUNITY

Community Section Front

The Week in Political Cartoons Clicked: One day at a time Cosmic Log: Light show sparks UFO buzz Daily Nightly: Read the latest entries ZeitGeist: Are mall Santas creepy? First Read: The day in politics News Hole: The blog of Countdown Daryl Cagle's Political Cartoon Weblog House OKs bill to let judges rewrite mortgages Critics see understaffed, overwhelmed Treasury Community Section Front   Add Community headlines to your news reader: