Dutch Ban Burqas

I'm not sure how I feel about this Dutch burqa ban.

My initial reaction is just this side of outrage, because everything about this smells like targeted, paranoid harassement. Plus it feels very illiberal. The banning of crash helmets with face visors under this law bothers me as well, because I know if I get a motorcycle some day I will want a face visor, not to commit crimes but to keep the fucking wind and bugs out of my face.

While we're at it, let's ban beards and trenchcoats. Beards cover your face and most Muslim men wear them, and, well, you've seen the Matrix. Let's ban those SARS masks too, even though only old Asian women wear them any more. You never know, she might be from Indonesia and bomb-laden.

The best part of the whole story was the fact that the Immigration Minister said this ban was needed, as the BBC said, "to promote integration and tolerance."


However, I don't have an answer for the question of photo IDs. I guess you need a photo ID to do a lot of things, so the face covering would be a problem there. Although, we live in an age where I'd be fine just doing finger print identification and calling it even.

Talk of the Art: Science Friday

According to Foreign Policy Magazine's blog, we're under attack from above. Apparently "foreign" really does mean anything outside the physical boundaries of America (and one can assume our airspace boundary cuts off somewhere in the upper atmosphere).

In other Science Friday news, the award for the most made-up sounding science agency goes to the Space Telescope Science Institute.

(And for those of you who aren't hip to public radio, this is why my subject line is funny)

Candidate for Stupidest Pundit of the Year

Normally, I am a staunch advocate of the Washington Post. However, every once in a while they let some real tripe pass into their pages.

Mr. Samuels' stupid moustache aside, this editorial is so full of logical holes, unfounded conclusions, and dichotomous, oversimplified issues summaries that it could hardly pass as a high school five paragraph essay exercise.

He begins with the premise that the problem with democracy is democracy. Which, ok, I'll give him that. I'd say the problem with democracy is the voters, but that's sort of nit picking and we don't do that here.

But if you read the piece you almost get the feeling that Congress has put him up to it. He criticizes the public for having contradictory demands, such as wanting more services while paying less (or, not more) in taxes, wanting to pay less for gas while wanting more gas (without acknowledging the role politics plays in preventing any forward movement on that front), and complaining about how taxing illegal immigrants are on our system while at the same time not being willing to send them all home. I will admit, the public has demands on these issues that are not fluidly compatible and seamless.

But wait. Isn't that the job of Congress? To take account of the public demands (all of them), synthesize them, and produce comprehensive legislation that addresses as many of the issues as possible? It's like saying "The public doesn't want us to be in Iraq any more, but they don't want us to leave a broken, failed state. Their demands are unreasonable." No, their demands are not unreasonable, their demands simply require a bit of creativity and hard work on the part of Congress. If only!

Oh, but that's not all. Not only are the government's policies "ignorant, confused and contradictory," it's the public's fault that because public opinion is that way. What a complete load of garbage. Let me give you a basic summary of public opinion: "I want my life to be easier, more comfortable, and longer, and I don't want to pay more taxes for it." That is about the extent of public opinion. It in no way bleeds into specific policies. Only end points.

Which is why another point that he makes, that "Democracy is working, because public attitudes remain the dominant influence -- not 'big money' or 'special interests,' as many believe" is, as we all know, complete BS. Completely! This assumes things like A) the public is involved in policy development but the special interests aren't, B) the public knows what policies are being enacted, C) public opinions are shaping and sculpting actual policy and not just setting vague boundaries for what Congress can get away with legislating.

I won't even get into the more fundamental flaws with his assessment, such as the fact that there is no "public opinion" in the first place. People in the public have opinions, sure, but that does not translate into something that can be called "public opinion" or "public will."

So, way to go, WaPo. I hope this little stint into slumming it for a day on your Op-Ed page has satiated your taste for pure garbage for a long time.

Egyptians Hate Danes More than Us!

A completely meaningless poll found that Denmark still holds the most ire from Egyptians because of that cartoon spat from well over a year ago.

If this isn't cultural chauvinism at its peak. Maybe I was raised a little too culturally relativist in the far-left American Public Re-Education Centers, but seriously, let it go. Egyptians (and, really, all Arabs) need as many allies as they can get, given that they are on the receiving end of our War on (of) Terror (thanks, Borat!). An extended olive branch of respectful disagreement and discussion about how to move forward to make sure both sides are satisfied would have not only way legitimized Egypt as a mature player on the world stage, but would have endeared them to Denmark, potentially creating an Arab advocate within the West.

I'm all for freedom of speech. I think the Danes should not feel the least bit guilty about publishing incendiary cartoons. I'm sure this sentiment was made clear by thousands of other people many months ago, but seriously, Egyptians, give it a rest. We get it. You're pious. Congratulations. I'm sure you'll get to heaven faster than the rest of us, who probably aren't even going to heaven in the first place within your framework of deciding that sort of thing, so why does it matter what we do? Let us sin our way to hell in peace. Look at it this way: don't be mad that we're sinning, be happy that you won't have to put up with our sinning in heaven!

And start hating countries for actual atrocities they commit, not cartoons they publish.

Speaking of which, where were you guys on Family Circus and Marmaduke? Seriously guys, riot and allow ambiguous hatred to fester over those ones. They're so not funny!

In Need of a Bath

I am weirded out by my 100% agreement with one of the leading Neoconservative writers of the day. Charles Krauthammer wrote a piece for the Washington Post last week about how ironic the Islamist (read: Islamist, not Islamic) reaction to the Pope was.

But he's right:

Religious fanatics, regardless of what name they give their jealous god, invariably have one thing in common: no sense of humor. Particularly about themselves.

If there's one thing I'm more in favor of than civil dialogue and centrist politics, it's having a sense of humor. And, on this relatively nuanced point, Krauthammer got it right.

The Pile Should Never Be This Big

I don't care about the push to ban gay marriage in the constitution, I don't care about the religionization of our government, I don't even care that corruption runs rampant through our congress. Keep it. I don't care.

This is why I'm required by conscience to be a political scientist. It's up to me to fix it, because no one else seems to be. But dear God I hope there are others out there with my same mentality, and that I meet them some day.

Pittying Fools

So, apparenlty Mr. T has a reali-T show (his words, not mine) that consists of him driving from town to town pittying fools.

My initial reaction is to call it genius. But really, it'll be banal and probably rather boring.

The Republicans Are Coming!

Well, I suppose it would be more accurate to say the Republicans are going, considering I'm not in Minneapolis any more. But I will likely be! So read this post again in a year. The subject will be accurate.

The Democrats are looking at either New York or Denver. Denver is the better choice for two reasons:

1. If the Democrats choose New York it will only serve to highlight and reinforce the fact that they have no other campaign strategy than to dig through the Republicans' trash bin for ideas.

2. New York is full of hippies anyway. Reach outside of your comfort zone and represent yourself somewhere other than the Northeast for once.

And St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman gets the award for Telling It Most Like It Is:

"The good news about the Republicans choosing us instead of the Democrats," Coleman joked, "is they have more money."

He's Saying What We're All Thinking More Modest and Less venomous Versions of

Hugo Chavez, Robin to Mahmoud Ahmadenijad's Batman, is doing his job as rhetorical hyperbolic rabblerouser quite well. He's telling it like it is, folks:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez took his verbal battle with the United States to the floor of the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, calling President Bush "the devil."

You go girl.