New flava in ya ear!
The Dream.
Hater.
A Lyric Video.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
REAL TALK: The "CNN First 100 Days: Assessing the 'Swagga' " Edition
Just you watch.
This can't be life.
This can't be life.
100 Days, 100 Nights.
A[nother] Look Back.
"Y'al know what this is!"
Words.
"In his 100th-day news conference, Obama had a bit of my-burden-is-great tone, while going out of his way to reject cartoon liberalism. “I don’t want to run auto companies,” he said. “I don’t want to run banks. I’ve got two wars to run already.”
He seemed genuinely humbled by his meetings with average servicemen and servicewomen, and empathetic to the moral qualms presented to any woman considering an abortion.
What we are seeing is a president, though arguably more liberal than anyone since Lyndon Johnson, who is hard to dismiss in the shorthand of our politics – the caricature branding of left or right.
Karl Rove insists that Obama is a more polarizing president than George W. Bush, pointing to yawning approval gap between Democrats and Republicans. Nobody knows how to wield a wedge like Rove, but he’s wrong on this one.
The gap is there because the Republican Party has shrunk to a raisin of its former self, baking in the sun of the old Confederacy. A mere 21 percent of people called themselves Republicans in a Washington Post poll. The vast majority of the country – Democrats and independents – are with Obama, given his high marks by both groups...
...No doubt, 38 percent of Americans are still conservative, as they’ve been for the last 20 years. But a good portion of them are no longer Republican.
They are parked, for now, in a lane of open-mindedness, along with the 75 percent of Americans who see Obama as a “strong leader.” If their president also happens to be a liberal, they don’t care – so long as he succeeds."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Off-Brand Presidency
"Y'al know what this is!"
Words.
"In his 100th-day news conference, Obama had a bit of my-burden-is-great tone, while going out of his way to reject cartoon liberalism. “I don’t want to run auto companies,” he said. “I don’t want to run banks. I’ve got two wars to run already.”
He seemed genuinely humbled by his meetings with average servicemen and servicewomen, and empathetic to the moral qualms presented to any woman considering an abortion.
What we are seeing is a president, though arguably more liberal than anyone since Lyndon Johnson, who is hard to dismiss in the shorthand of our politics – the caricature branding of left or right.
Karl Rove insists that Obama is a more polarizing president than George W. Bush, pointing to yawning approval gap between Democrats and Republicans. Nobody knows how to wield a wedge like Rove, but he’s wrong on this one.
The gap is there because the Republican Party has shrunk to a raisin of its former self, baking in the sun of the old Confederacy. A mere 21 percent of people called themselves Republicans in a Washington Post poll. The vast majority of the country – Democrats and independents – are with Obama, given his high marks by both groups...
...No doubt, 38 percent of Americans are still conservative, as they’ve been for the last 20 years. But a good portion of them are no longer Republican.
They are parked, for now, in a lane of open-mindedness, along with the 75 percent of Americans who see Obama as a “strong leader.” If their president also happens to be a liberal, they don’t care – so long as he succeeds."
Words.
For Your Consideration.
"Lately, we've heard and read much about torture memos, waterboarding and insects in a box. It has been the occasion for somber reflection on our past and serious deliberation about our future. This is as it should be. It was Arizona Sen. John McCain, in talking about torture, who rightly reminded us that "it's not about who they are. It's about who we are."
But perhaps we also should remember that there was a human being strapped to that board. His name is Zayn al Abidin Mohamed Hussein, known to the world as Abu Zubaydah...
...First, they beat him. As authorized by the Justice Department and confirmed by the Red Cross, they wrapped a collar around his neck and smashed him over and over against a wall. They forced his body into a tiny, pitch-dark box and left him for hours. They stripped him naked and suspended him from hooks in the ceiling. They kept him awake for days.
And they strapped him to an inverted board and poured water over his covered nose and mouth to "produce the sensation of suffocation and incipient panic." Eighty-three times. I leave it to others to debate whether we should call this torture. I am content with the self-evident truth that it was wrong.
Second, his treatment was motivated by the bane of our post-9/11 world: rotten intel. The beat him because they believed he was evil. Not long after his arrest, President Bush described him as "one of the top three leaders" in Al Qaeda and "Al Qaeda's chief of operations." In fact, the CIA brass at Langley, Va., ordered his interrogators to keep at it long after the latter warned that he had been wrung dry.
But Abu Zubaydah, we now understand, was nothing like what the president believed. He was never Al Qaeda. The journalist Ron Suskind was the first to ask the right questions. In his 2006 book, "The One Percent Doctrine," he described Abu Zubaydah as a minor logistics man, a travel agent.
Later and more detailed reporting in the Washington Post, quoting Justice Department officials, said he provided "above-ground support. ... To make him the mastermind of anything is ridiculous." More recently, the New York Times, relying on current and former intelligence officers, said the initial assessment was "highly inflated" and reflected "a profound misunderstanding" of Abu Zubaydah. Far from a leader, he was "a personnel clerk."
So two legs of the stool are fixed: They tormented a clerk. But there is a third leg that should not be left out. No one can pass unscathed through an ordeal like this. Abu Zubaydah paid with his mind."
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Abu Zubaydah's suffering
"Lately, we've heard and read much about torture memos, waterboarding and insects in a box. It has been the occasion for somber reflection on our past and serious deliberation about our future. This is as it should be. It was Arizona Sen. John McCain, in talking about torture, who rightly reminded us that "it's not about who they are. It's about who we are."
But perhaps we also should remember that there was a human being strapped to that board. His name is Zayn al Abidin Mohamed Hussein, known to the world as Abu Zubaydah...
...First, they beat him. As authorized by the Justice Department and confirmed by the Red Cross, they wrapped a collar around his neck and smashed him over and over against a wall. They forced his body into a tiny, pitch-dark box and left him for hours. They stripped him naked and suspended him from hooks in the ceiling. They kept him awake for days.
And they strapped him to an inverted board and poured water over his covered nose and mouth to "produce the sensation of suffocation and incipient panic." Eighty-three times. I leave it to others to debate whether we should call this torture. I am content with the self-evident truth that it was wrong.
Second, his treatment was motivated by the bane of our post-9/11 world: rotten intel. The beat him because they believed he was evil. Not long after his arrest, President Bush described him as "one of the top three leaders" in Al Qaeda and "Al Qaeda's chief of operations." In fact, the CIA brass at Langley, Va., ordered his interrogators to keep at it long after the latter warned that he had been wrung dry.
But Abu Zubaydah, we now understand, was nothing like what the president believed. He was never Al Qaeda. The journalist Ron Suskind was the first to ask the right questions. In his 2006 book, "The One Percent Doctrine," he described Abu Zubaydah as a minor logistics man, a travel agent.
Later and more detailed reporting in the Washington Post, quoting Justice Department officials, said he provided "above-ground support. ... To make him the mastermind of anything is ridiculous." More recently, the New York Times, relying on current and former intelligence officers, said the initial assessment was "highly inflated" and reflected "a profound misunderstanding" of Abu Zubaydah. Far from a leader, he was "a personnel clerk."
So two legs of the stool are fixed: They tormented a clerk. But there is a third leg that should not be left out. No one can pass unscathed through an ordeal like this. Abu Zubaydah paid with his mind."
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
100 Days, 100 Nights.
Holla Back!
Words.
"...the first 100 days have been brisk, if entirely too long. And action-packed. Obama has done so much, so fast, that our heads spin. If this is not a tactic, it should be. He seems blessed with the immaculate timing in which events don’t just open a window, but nuke the building. In breezes Obama with his team of carpenters. While Americans were distracted with lost jobs and decimated savings, Team Obama re-landscaped the American Dream with spending and future debts that are beyond our comprehension. Now comes the perfect storm of avian, swine and human flu, just in time for a national health plan. Timing really is everything.
Here’s the thing about Obama: He’s a completely new deal. We’ve never see this character before. Each day is a new play and we’re not quite sure how this particular narrative arcs. All of that makes us a bit uneasy, as it should. But my truest sense of Obama is that he thinks hard about each issue and that his mind is open. He is still finding out how to be president, listening instead of talking; watching and measuring, as children from disrupted childhood learn to do."
Dear Diary,
"IT is disheartening and disconcerting, at the very least, that here we are today — almost exactly eight years after Senator Jim Jeffords left the Republican Party — witnessing the departure of my good friend and fellow moderate Republican, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, for the Democratic Party. And the announcement of his switch was all the more painful because I believe it didn’t have to be this way..."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: We Didn’t Have to Lose Arlen Specter by Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)
Wall of Sound.
FILE UNDER: POLITICS: So Fucking Disco!/A Moment of Clarity.
Maybe?
Words.
"...A 60th vote...It takes 60 votes to move most legislation in the Senate. Until Tuesday, the Democrats had 58, including Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, another prickly maverick. Seat No. 59 belongs to Democratic comedian Al Franken -- if he can just get Minnesota's Supreme Court to certify his victory. Arlen Specter will make
60.
That's why the Democrats welcomed Specter with open arms. His defection not only made the Republican Party look bad, it boosted Obama's chances of passing legislation on his agenda of healthcare, energy and education before the 2010 election.
But 60 seats can be a mixed blessing. With 60 seats, the Democrats will have no excuses, no one else to blame, any time they can't hold their big caucus together. Their most independent, unpredictable members will enjoy massive power -- not just Specter but also Lieberman and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, another centrist.
And Specter has always been hard to please. He'll still be the 60th vote on every issue, just as he was on the stimulus bill -- the one who always has a special request before he can say yes. Reid will sometimes wonder whether this was such a good deal.
At the same time, a 60-vote majority can turn into an invitation to abandon bipartisanship. Obama set out to be a post-partisan president, crafting bills that could attract Republican support, but the stimulus plan turned into an exercise in polarization. If healthcare legislation becomes a Democrats-only affair, that will be the end of Obama's commitment to bringing along both sides of the aisle.
Specter's defection was good news for Democrats mostly because it showed that the Republican Party isn't through shrinking. The GOP, stung by its defeats in 2006 and 2008, hasn't yet come up with a recovery plan. Part of the party thinks the answer is to become more conservative; radio host Rush Limbaugh, for example, hailed Specter's departure as "good -- you're weeding out people who aren't really Republicans." "Big tent" Republicans like Sen. John S. McCain subscribe to a more conventional approach, working on the theory that a more inclusive party stands a better chance of attracting voters.
That approach, after all, is how the Democrats won so many seats in 2006. Under Rahm Emanuel, now Obama's chief of staff, they welcomed anyone who looked capable of winning an election, beliefs be hanged.
That's the party Arlen Specter just joined: the Let's Make a Deal Party. What it loses in coherence, it makes up in voting power."
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Arlen Specter and the Democrats: Be careful what you wish for
Maybe?
Words.
"...A 60th vote...It takes 60 votes to move most legislation in the Senate. Until Tuesday, the Democrats had 58, including Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, another prickly maverick. Seat No. 59 belongs to Democratic comedian Al Franken -- if he can just get Minnesota's Supreme Court to certify his victory. Arlen Specter will make
60.
That's why the Democrats welcomed Specter with open arms. His defection not only made the Republican Party look bad, it boosted Obama's chances of passing legislation on his agenda of healthcare, energy and education before the 2010 election.
But 60 seats can be a mixed blessing. With 60 seats, the Democrats will have no excuses, no one else to blame, any time they can't hold their big caucus together. Their most independent, unpredictable members will enjoy massive power -- not just Specter but also Lieberman and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, another centrist.
And Specter has always been hard to please. He'll still be the 60th vote on every issue, just as he was on the stimulus bill -- the one who always has a special request before he can say yes. Reid will sometimes wonder whether this was such a good deal.
At the same time, a 60-vote majority can turn into an invitation to abandon bipartisanship. Obama set out to be a post-partisan president, crafting bills that could attract Republican support, but the stimulus plan turned into an exercise in polarization. If healthcare legislation becomes a Democrats-only affair, that will be the end of Obama's commitment to bringing along both sides of the aisle.
Specter's defection was good news for Democrats mostly because it showed that the Republican Party isn't through shrinking. The GOP, stung by its defeats in 2006 and 2008, hasn't yet come up with a recovery plan. Part of the party thinks the answer is to become more conservative; radio host Rush Limbaugh, for example, hailed Specter's departure as "good -- you're weeding out people who aren't really Republicans." "Big tent" Republicans like Sen. John S. McCain subscribe to a more conventional approach, working on the theory that a more inclusive party stands a better chance of attracting voters.
That approach, after all, is how the Democrats won so many seats in 2006. Under Rahm Emanuel, now Obama's chief of staff, they welcomed anyone who looked capable of winning an election, beliefs be hanged.
That's the party Arlen Specter just joined: the Let's Make a Deal Party. What it loses in coherence, it makes up in voting power."
Power Rangers.
This? This shit right here? Golden. Magic. Fan-f***ing-tastic! Why? Because it ends with footage from what is, for me, the only period of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers worth watching/remembering. But then again, maybe I am biased, seeing as how episodes from said period were my part of my complete balanced afternoon cartoon and live action show for kids diet back in the day. Check it out!
[ED'S NOTE: That Power Rangers footage that you might seek comes in towards the end of the segment]
[ED'S NOTE: That Power Rangers footage that you might seek comes in towards the end of the segment]
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Your Government Not at Work - Jane Harman Scandal | ||||
| ||||
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
H.R. Pufnstuf.
Barack Obama: "Keeping it 100", which, apparently, is too much. Just ask Jonah Goldberg:
Words.
"The most remarkable, or certainly the least remarked on, aspect of Barack Obama's first 100 days has been the infectious arrogance of his presidency.
There's no denying that this is liberalism's greatest opportunity for wish fulfillment since at least 1964. But to listen to Democrats, the only check on their ambition is the limits of their imaginations...
It says something about the relationship of liberals to political power that they can overlook domestic dissent when they're at the wheel. When the GOP is in office, America is seen as hopelessly divided because dissent is the highest form of patriotism. When Democrats are in charge, the Frank Riches suddenly declare the culture war over and dismiss dissent as the scary work of the sort of cranks Obama's Department of Homeland Security needs to monitor.
If liberals thought so fondly of social peace and consensus, they would look more favorably on the 1920s and 1950s. Instead, their political idylls are the tumultuous '30s and '60s, when liberalism, if not necessarily liberals, rode high in the saddle.
Sure, America was divided under Bush. And it's still divided under Obama (just look at the recent Minnesota Senate race and the New York congressional special election). According to the polls, America is a bit less divided under Obama than it was at the end of Bush's 100 days. But not as much less as you would expect, given Obama's victory margin and the rally-around-the-president effect of the financial crisis (not to mention the disarray of the GOP).
Meanwhile, circulation for the conservative National Review (where I work) is soaring. More people watch Fox News (where I am a contributor) in prime time than watch CNN and MSNBC combined. The "tea parties" may not have been as big as your typical union-organized "spontaneous" demonstration, but they were far more significant than any protests this early in Bush's tenure.
And yet, according to Democrats and liberal pundits, America is enjoying unprecedented unity, and conservatives are going the way of the dodo."
Misunderestimated?
Words.
"Judging by his April 24 Times Op-Ed article, "The GOP: divorced from reality," alleged comedian Bill Maher is confused about the message of the April 15 "tea party" protests. In saying demonstrators were merely sore losers reacting to an election that didn't go in their favor, Maher ignores the clear statements made by the overwhelming majority of the hundreds of thousands of ordinary Americans who took to the streets earlier this month: Enough bailouts. Enough debt. Enough taxes...The "tea parties" showed that ordinary Americans understand what's happening a lot better than elites like Maher, who has an easy time accepting the Obama administration's claim that taxes will go up only slightly and only for the rich."
Video.
Thought @ work.
LOS ANGELES TIMES: BLOWBACK: The 'tea parties' had a serious message -- were you listening?
EARLIER:
Grand Old Party?
"Judging by his April 24 Times Op-Ed article, "The GOP: divorced from reality," alleged comedian Bill Maher is confused about the message of the April 15 "tea party" protests. In saying demonstrators were merely sore losers reacting to an election that didn't go in their favor, Maher ignores the clear statements made by the overwhelming majority of the hundreds of thousands of ordinary Americans who took to the streets earlier this month: Enough bailouts. Enough debt. Enough taxes...The "tea parties" showed that ordinary Americans understand what's happening a lot better than elites like Maher, who has an easy time accepting the Obama administration's claim that taxes will go up only slightly and only for the rich."
Video.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Tea Party Tyranny | ||||
| ||||
Thought @ work.
EARLIER:
Monday, April 27, 2009
Neverland.
Imagine...
Words.
"Watching Dick Cheney defend the Bush administration’s interrogation policies, it’s been hard to escape the impression that both the Republican Party and the country would be better off today if Cheney, rather than John McCain, had been a candidate for president in 2008.
Certainly Cheney himself seems to feel that way. Last week’s Sean Hannity interview, all anti-Obama jabs and roundhouses, was the latest installment in the vice president’s unexpected – and, to Republican politicians, distinctly unwelcome – transformation from election-season wallflower into high-profile spokesman for the conservative opposition. George W. Bush seems happy to be back in civilian life, but Cheney has taken the fight to the Obama White House like a man who wouldn’t have minded campaigning for a third Bush-Cheney term.
Imagine for a moment that he’d had that chance. Imagine that he’d damned the poll numbers, broken his oft-repeated pledge that he had no presidential ambitions of his own, and shouldered his way into the race. Imagine that Republican primary voters, more favorably disposed than most Americans to Cheney and the administration he served, had rewarded him with the nomination..."
Fur Soft as Fur.
New flava in ya ear!
The Boy Least Likely To.
When Life Gives Me Lemons I Make Lemonade.
Big ups to the folks over atStereogum for putting this on my radar! That's what's up!
The Boy Least Likely To.
When Life Gives Me Lemons I Make Lemonade.
Big ups to the folks over at
Colors.
Words.
For Your Consideration...
"The recent talk of secession on the political right has not been racially based per se, but it would be naive not to suspect a racial component. Just as Unz warned, there does seem to be a growing number of whites who feel -- and act -- like an aggrieved minority. And the signs aren't just coming from the far-right extreme.
Just last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a workplace discrimination case filed by a firefighter in New Haven, Conn., who claims he was passed over for promotion because he is white. Last August, the New York Times-owned Ocala Star-Banner in Florida published an opinion article by an immigration-restriction activist who claimed that "whites in America are going to be disempowered, assuming we remain a democracy, through a radical and rapid transformation of the nation's demography on a scale unprecedented in world history."
We're likely to hear more such sentiments as the nation goes through the same demographic transition that California has experienced.
Fox News' Glenn Beck has even posited a creepy "Bubba effect." In February, his guest was a retired Army sergeant major who talked about the expanding ranks of survivalists, who "lose that faith and confidence within the various politicians" and "end up developing their own infrastructure, their own means to survive, to basically fend for themselves."
I don't want to make the same mistake Schlesinger did and overestimate the influence of such sentiments, but it's disturbing to see mainstream politicians such as Perry and Palin and talk-show hosts give these ideas any credibility whatsoever.
In some ways, the election of Barack Obama is a culmination of the mainstreaming of nonwhite minorities. Despite the worst excesses of multicultural separatist rhetoric and activism, these groups are more politically integrated than ever before. Now we shouldn't be surprised to hear louder calls for separation, secession or national disintegration from whites than from nonwhites."
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Now who's dividing America?
For Your Consideration...
"The recent talk of secession on the political right has not been racially based per se, but it would be naive not to suspect a racial component. Just as Unz warned, there does seem to be a growing number of whites who feel -- and act -- like an aggrieved minority. And the signs aren't just coming from the far-right extreme.
Just last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a workplace discrimination case filed by a firefighter in New Haven, Conn., who claims he was passed over for promotion because he is white. Last August, the New York Times-owned Ocala Star-Banner in Florida published an opinion article by an immigration-restriction activist who claimed that "whites in America are going to be disempowered, assuming we remain a democracy, through a radical and rapid transformation of the nation's demography on a scale unprecedented in world history."
We're likely to hear more such sentiments as the nation goes through the same demographic transition that California has experienced.
Fox News' Glenn Beck has even posited a creepy "Bubba effect." In February, his guest was a retired Army sergeant major who talked about the expanding ranks of survivalists, who "lose that faith and confidence within the various politicians" and "end up developing their own infrastructure, their own means to survive, to basically fend for themselves."
I don't want to make the same mistake Schlesinger did and overestimate the influence of such sentiments, but it's disturbing to see mainstream politicians such as Perry and Palin and talk-show hosts give these ideas any credibility whatsoever.
In some ways, the election of Barack Obama is a culmination of the mainstreaming of nonwhite minorities. Despite the worst excesses of multicultural separatist rhetoric and activism, these groups are more politically integrated than ever before. Now we shouldn't be surprised to hear louder calls for separation, secession or national disintegration from whites than from nonwhites."
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Oh Carbon Dioxide!
Silver Medal/#2/At the one minute twenty-five second mark.
Just you watch...*
*[ED'S NOTE: #1 is awful too.]
Just you watch...*
*[ED'S NOTE: #1 is awful too.]
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Grand Old Party?
Words.
"If conservatives don't want to be seen as bitter people who cling to their guns and religion and anti-immigrant sentiments, they should stop being bitter and clinging to their guns, religion and anti-immigrant sentiments.
It's been a week now, and I still don't know what those "tea bag" protests were about. I saw signs protesting abortion, illegal immigrants, the bank bailout and that gay guy who's going to win "American Idol." But it wasn't tax day that made them crazy; it was election day. Because that's when Republicans became what they fear most: a minority.
The conservative base is absolutely apoplectic because, because ... well, nobody knows. They're mad as hell, and they're not going to take it anymore. Even though they're not quite sure what "it" is. But they know they're fed up with "it," and that "it" has got to stop.
Here are the big issues for normal people: the war, the economy, the environment, mending fences with our enemies and allies, and the rule of law.
And here's the list of Republican obsessions since President Obama took office: that his birth certificate is supposedly fake, he uses a teleprompter too much, he bowed to a Saudi guy, Europeans like him, he gives inappropriate gifts, his wife shamelessly flaunts her upper arms, and he shook hands with Hugo Chavez and slipped him the nuclear launch codes.
Do these sound like the concerns of a healthy, vibrant political party?
It's sad what's happened to the Republicans. They used to be the party of the big tent; now they're the party of the sideshow attraction, a socially awkward group of mostly white people who speak a language only they understand. Like Trekkies, but paranoid."
This is how we do it.
Yes it is Stevie. You don't even know...
Now if you visit this blog often, you know that old school jams are more often than not posted under the "Old School Funk for the True Funk Soldiers" headline. But sometimes old school joints are so good, so well put together, so classic to a brotha, [see Montell Jordan's This is how we do it] that all I can do is marvel at their goodness as they boldly play on and show us how's it done. This jam, presented below, is one such example.
When a hushed and soulful/slow grooving Stevie Wonder track is playing I like to fancy myself a true "singer", put the world on pause, and just revel in the good times. I can't help it. And neither should you.
Stevie Wonder.
Hey Love.
Act like you know.
Now if you visit this blog often, you know that old school jams are more often than not posted under the "Old School Funk for the True Funk Soldiers" headline. But sometimes old school joints are so good, so well put together, so classic to a brotha, [see Montell Jordan's This is how we do it] that all I can do is marvel at their goodness as they boldly play on and show us how's it done. This jam, presented below, is one such example.
When a hushed and soulful/slow grooving Stevie Wonder track is playing I like to fancy myself a true "singer", put the world on pause, and just revel in the good times. I can't help it. And neither should you.
Stevie Wonder.
Hey Love.
Act like you know.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Talk to Me.
"A, you got this, right?"
Words. For Your Consideration.
"Mr. Cheney claims that the waterboarding saved thousands of lives. Most accounts that don’t come from officials involved in the formation of those policies suggest that that is not the case. The question needs to be answered so Americans can decide if they want to buy into Mr. Cheney’s view that the ends always justify such barbaric means.
Americans also need to know who pushed the Justice Department lawyers to twist the law and the Constitution to excuse torture. And we need to know the legal reasoning, if any, behind former President George W. Bush’s decision to authorize illegal tapping of Americans’ telephones and e-mail accounts.
We need to know the legal reasoning, planning and authorization behind Mr. Bush’s program of “extraordinary rendition” — in which people were abducted and sent to countries where it was obvious to all that they were in danger of being tortured, or would be tortured.
Until these questions are answered, there is no way to ensure that these abuses will never be repeated. And the only way to get those answers is with a full investigation that has both stature and subpoena power."
Right Here, Right Now.
A Moment of Clarity.
Words.
"...To some degree, words failed us all in the aftermath of 9/11, a time of fear and disorientation. Journalists did not meet the challenge of holding the executive branch accountable, politically and morally, in the run-up to the Iraq war. Such failures, it is true, were not gross manipulations of the law in the service of inhumanity, but they were failures nonetheless. And they carried a human price.
So I’m wary of the clamor for retribution. Congress failed. The press failed. The judiciary failed. With almost 3,000 dead, America’s checks and balances got skewed, from the Capitol to Wall Street. Scrutiny gave way to acquiescence. Words were spun in feckless patterns.
Those checks and balances are recovering now. I don’t think this recovery would be served by prosecutions, either of C.I.A. operatives or those who gave them legal advice. Such legal action, if initiated, would split the intelligence services and the military in paralyzing ways at a time when two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are still being fought. The country would be lacerated.
The right balance between retribution and reconciliation is always hard to find in the aftermath of national trauma. Ask the Bosnians or South Africans about the trade-offs between justice and recovery. When wars are ongoing, it is wise to err on the side of caution. There’s work to do. Obama’s right: America should look ahead, not back..."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: No Time for Retribution
EARLIER:
Yeah, Yeah, Yeahs.
"Talk and talk and talk and talk!"
Words.
"...To some degree, words failed us all in the aftermath of 9/11, a time of fear and disorientation. Journalists did not meet the challenge of holding the executive branch accountable, politically and morally, in the run-up to the Iraq war. Such failures, it is true, were not gross manipulations of the law in the service of inhumanity, but they were failures nonetheless. And they carried a human price.
So I’m wary of the clamor for retribution. Congress failed. The press failed. The judiciary failed. With almost 3,000 dead, America’s checks and balances got skewed, from the Capitol to Wall Street. Scrutiny gave way to acquiescence. Words were spun in feckless patterns.
Those checks and balances are recovering now. I don’t think this recovery would be served by prosecutions, either of C.I.A. operatives or those who gave them legal advice. Such legal action, if initiated, would split the intelligence services and the military in paralyzing ways at a time when two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are still being fought. The country would be lacerated.
The right balance between retribution and reconciliation is always hard to find in the aftermath of national trauma. Ask the Bosnians or South Africans about the trade-offs between justice and recovery. When wars are ongoing, it is wise to err on the side of caution. There’s work to do. Obama’s right: America should look ahead, not back..."
EARLIER:
Gettin' It.
A Moment of Clarity.
"As we approach the 100-day mark for the Obama administration, you will hear and see a wide variety of grades for the new president's performance.
Remember this: What has happened so far is no more than the overture to the first act of this opera. The big stuff is still to come. The soprano has not opened her mouth for her signature aria. That will be health-care reform. The devilish baritone is still offstage. Wait for the first international crisis.
Barack Obama has launched a lot of initiatives but has fulfilled few of them. What he has shown -- and it is an important accomplishment in itself -- is a mastery of the art of managing the presidency."
REAL TALK: The -SIGH- "It's a Pirate's Life for Me" Edition.
Courtesy of South Park.
Pause.
You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.
Pause.
You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
"Something like a Phenomenon?"
Words. For Your Consideration...
"...Watching at first, we too are the sneering audience members, the young girls who roll their eyes. (Note how carefully edited the audience shots are.) But—then, cue the music, and even as Boyle is just opening her mouth, people's faces are lighting up. She has relaxed into herself and her voice is... pretty good. (Not great.) And so we get to exhale and let our saccharine hearts soar with the schmaltzy music as, for a moment, we see "proven" on TV that looks and sex aren't everything. For that moment, the light mantle of eros even seems to rest around Boyle—she smiles, she has some cultural worth, someone, we think, might even kiss her one day! Thus, release. In a sense, Boyle inhabits the role of the scapegoat of early village traditions whom we punish with exile (or sneering), but whom we now, through the magic vehicle of TV, welcome back into the fold, surprising ourselves with our capacious hearts."
SLATE: The Contrarian Take on Susan Boyle
"...Watching at first, we too are the sneering audience members, the young girls who roll their eyes. (Note how carefully edited the audience shots are.) But—then, cue the music, and even as Boyle is just opening her mouth, people's faces are lighting up. She has relaxed into herself and her voice is... pretty good. (Not great.) And so we get to exhale and let our saccharine hearts soar with the schmaltzy music as, for a moment, we see "proven" on TV that looks and sex aren't everything. For that moment, the light mantle of eros even seems to rest around Boyle—she smiles, she has some cultural worth, someone, we think, might even kiss her one day! Thus, release. In a sense, Boyle inhabits the role of the scapegoat of early village traditions whom we punish with exile (or sneering), but whom we now, through the magic vehicle of TV, welcome back into the fold, surprising ourselves with our capacious hearts."
No Child Left Behind.
A Moment of Clarity.
Words.
"Speaking of financial crises and how they can expose weak companies and weak countries, Warren Buffett once famously quipped that “only when the tide goes out do you find out who is not wearing a bathing suit.” So true. But what’s really unnerving is that America appears to be one of those countries that has been swimming buck naked — in more ways than one.
Credit bubbles are like the tide. They can cover up a lot of rot. In our case, the excess consumer demand and jobs created by our credit and housing bubbles have masked not only our weaknesses in manufacturing and other economic fundamentals, but something worse: how far we have fallen behind in K-12 education and how much it is now costing us. That is the conclusion I drew from a new study by the consulting firm McKinsey, entitled “The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America’s Schools.”
Just a quick review: In the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. dominated the world in K-12 education. We also dominated economically. In the 1970s and 1980s, we still had a lead, albeit smaller, in educating our population through secondary school, and America continued to lead the world economically, albeit with other big economies, like China, closing in. Today, we have fallen behind in both per capita high school graduates and their quality. Consequences to follow."
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
"What's pimpin', Pimpin'?"
This can't be life. Seriously, are you fo'real?
Money Talks.
Words.
"...America once had a responsible economic culture, Obama argued. People used to save their pennies to buy their dream houses. Banks used to lend by “traditional standards.” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac used to stick to their “traditional mandate.” Companies like A.I.G. used to limit themselves to the “traditional insurance business.”
But these traditions broke down, Obama continued. They were swamped by irresponsibility. Businesspeople chased “short-term profits” over long-term investments. Smart people spent more time manipulating numbers and symbols than actually making things. Americans consumed too much and saved too little. America became corrupted by “excessive debt,” “reckless speculation” and “fleeting profits.”
Obama vowed to end this irresponsibility and the cycle of boom and bust. It’s time to get back to basics, he said. He embraced tradition, order and authority. He quoted the New Testament and argued that it is time that the U.S. built its economic house on rock and not sand.
If Republicans aren’t nervous, they should be. Obama is arguing for his activist agenda not on the basis of class-consciousness, which is alien to America, but as a defense of middle-class morality, which is central to it. Obama is positioning the Democrats as the party of order, responsibility and small-town values. If he pulls this mantle away from the Republicans, it would be the greatest train robbery in American politics."
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Big-Spending Conservative
"...America once had a responsible economic culture, Obama argued. People used to save their pennies to buy their dream houses. Banks used to lend by “traditional standards.” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac used to stick to their “traditional mandate.” Companies like A.I.G. used to limit themselves to the “traditional insurance business.”
But these traditions broke down, Obama continued. They were swamped by irresponsibility. Businesspeople chased “short-term profits” over long-term investments. Smart people spent more time manipulating numbers and symbols than actually making things. Americans consumed too much and saved too little. America became corrupted by “excessive debt,” “reckless speculation” and “fleeting profits.”
Obama vowed to end this irresponsibility and the cycle of boom and bust. It’s time to get back to basics, he said. He embraced tradition, order and authority. He quoted the New Testament and argued that it is time that the U.S. built its economic house on rock and not sand.
If Republicans aren’t nervous, they should be. Obama is arguing for his activist agenda not on the basis of class-consciousness, which is alien to America, but as a defense of middle-class morality, which is central to it. Obama is positioning the Democrats as the party of order, responsibility and small-town values. If he pulls this mantle away from the Republicans, it would be the greatest train robbery in American politics."
"Talk and talk and talk and talk!"
FILE UNDER: Words/A Moment of Clarity/POLITICS AND AMERICA: Now that we've found love, what are we gonna do with it?
Yes? No? Maybe so?
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Obama Open to Inquiry in Interrogation Abuses
Yes? No? Maybe so?
Yeah, Yeah, Yeahs.
What’s better? What’s worse?
We faced some trying, difficult times as a country following September 11th. We wanted answers, we wanted security, we wanted vengeance, and we wanted to clarity. We wanted to stop all the world now, but we wanted to keep living. We wanted protection. We wanted security. We wanted to trust and believe that those on high would not let this happen again. We wanted to find comfort in the fact that they were doing whatever it took to keep us safe, protect us from harm, and keep us living without company on our back. We didn’t ask many questions. We took things at face value. It was not our job to know what was going on behind the scenes. Some of us prodded, yes. Some of us were skeptical, yes, but many of us were fine. Many of us were getting our security back. And really, who could have asked for anything more?
Really, what’s better? Really, what’s worse?
Torture. Apparently some of those on high approved methods and tactics you can file under torture. This is not the way some of us wanted it. This is not the way many people wanted it. There’s got to be other alternatives right? This can’t be the end all be all? This can’t be right/moral/just/okay? This. Can’t. Be. Life. Right? We want answers, we need answers. We want security, cause we need security. We want protection, cause, again, it is what’s needed, but at what cost? There’s got to be other alternatives right? Did anyone stop to weigh out all our options and simply ask,
Is this better? Or is this worse?
What do we do now? Where do we go from here? It’s out there. It’s all out there. Every paragraph, every detail, every semi-colon, every period. Every minute detail drawn up to “seek out” the truth. Whoop, there it is. So what do we do? Do we hold those on high who approved these things responsible, or do we simply move along, and walk on by. Do we say that time and energy does not need to be exhausted on the prosecution and hunting down of former officials when there are other things worth crying for in our country at the moment? That works, right? What’s done is done? Learn from it, correct it, move on, right?
I mean you got a better alternative? Few things could be worse, right?
I don’t know. We all don’t know. We just want answers. We just want protection. We. Seek. Clarity. But are we still sure we’re getting it? We’re not prosecuting those on high who we say are responsible, yet we are. We all know what was done. We’ve applied faces to the names. And in the end, we have decided to keep it simple, and keep it schoolyard. We may not be able to get these bandits directly, but boy will we shame them. We’ll show you how ruthless, heartless, dirty, and rotten these players can be with their methods and tactics. And we’ll stop there. We’ll let you in on the secret and form your own opinion (hopefully one we share) and move on. It ain’t prosecution, but it’s a shaming, a good old fashioned shaming, and best of all, it establishes how us are nothing like them.
I still can’t decide if taking this road was better or whether I should throw in a vote for worse.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| We Don't Torture | ||||
| ||||
Monday, April 20, 2009
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Souled Out(?)!!!
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| The Colbert Coalition's Anti-Gay Marriage Ad | ||||
| ||||
The Fear.
A Moment of Clarity.
"Far from terrifying anyone, “Gathering Storm” has become, unsurprisingly, an Internet camp classic. On YouTube the original video must compete with countless homemade parodies it has inspired since first turning up some 10 days ago. None may top Stephen Colbert’s on Thursday night, in which lightning from “the homo storm” strikes an Arkansas teacher, turning him gay. A “New Jersey pastor” whose church has been “turned into an Abercrombie & Fitch” declares that he likes gay people, “but only as hilarious best friends in TV and movies.”
Yet easy to mock as “Gathering Storm” may be, it nonetheless bookmarks a historic turning point in the demise of America’s anti-gay movement."
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Purple Reign.
A Moment of Clarity.
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| The Colbert Coalition's Anti-Gay Marriage Ad | ||||
| ||||
Words.
A Moment of Clarity.
"...We should do something to get this insanity under control.
I’m not just talking about combating bullying, which has been a national obsession ever since Columbine, and yet seems to continue unabated. I’m only partly talking about homophobia, which, though virulent, cruel and occasionally fatal among teenagers, is not the whole story behind the fact that words like “fag” and “gay” are now among the most potent and feared weapons in the school bully’s arsenal.
Being called a “fag,” you see, actually has almost nothing to do with being gay.
It’s really about showing any perceived weakness or femininity – by being emotional, seeming incompetent, caring too much about clothing, liking to dance or even having an interest in literature. It’s similar to what being viewed as a “nerd” is, Bennington College psychology professor David Anderegg notes in his 2007 book, “Nerds: Who They Are and Why We Need More of Them”: “‘queer’ in the sense of being ‘odd’ or ‘unusual,’” but also, for middle schoolers in particular, doing “anything that was too much like what a goody-goody would do.”
It’s what being called a “girl” used to be, a generation or two ago.
“To call someone gay or fag is like the lowest thing you can call someone. Because that’s like saying that you’re nothing,” is how one teenage boy put it to C.J. Pascoe, a sociologist at Colorado College, in an interview for her 2007 book, “Dude, You’re a Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School.”
The message to the most vulnerable, to the victims of today’s poisonous boy culture, is being heard loud and clear: to be something other than the narrowest, stupidest sort of guy’s guy, is to be unworthy of even being alive."
NEW YORK TIMES: "Dude, You've Got Problems!"
"...We should do something to get this insanity under control.
I’m not just talking about combating bullying, which has been a national obsession ever since Columbine, and yet seems to continue unabated. I’m only partly talking about homophobia, which, though virulent, cruel and occasionally fatal among teenagers, is not the whole story behind the fact that words like “fag” and “gay” are now among the most potent and feared weapons in the school bully’s arsenal.
Being called a “fag,” you see, actually has almost nothing to do with being gay.
It’s really about showing any perceived weakness or femininity – by being emotional, seeming incompetent, caring too much about clothing, liking to dance or even having an interest in literature. It’s similar to what being viewed as a “nerd” is, Bennington College psychology professor David Anderegg notes in his 2007 book, “Nerds: Who They Are and Why We Need More of Them”: “‘queer’ in the sense of being ‘odd’ or ‘unusual,’” but also, for middle schoolers in particular, doing “anything that was too much like what a goody-goody would do.”
It’s what being called a “girl” used to be, a generation or two ago.
“To call someone gay or fag is like the lowest thing you can call someone. Because that’s like saying that you’re nothing,” is how one teenage boy put it to C.J. Pascoe, a sociologist at Colorado College, in an interview for her 2007 book, “Dude, You’re a Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School.”
The message to the most vulnerable, to the victims of today’s poisonous boy culture, is being heard loud and clear: to be something other than the narrowest, stupidest sort of guy’s guy, is to be unworthy of even being alive."
Go Tell it on the Mountain!
Once more, with feeling.
Words.
"The cool, cerebral White House might logically conclude that Wednesday's decidedly uncool, uncerebral "tea bag" protests were intellectually and politically incoherent, and therefore not worth a second thought. That would be a dangerous mistake.
The made-for-television demonstrations in cities across the country were generally small, and the only thing they proved conclusively is that -- you might want to sit down -- some Americans don't much enjoy paying taxes. What the rallies suggested, however, is that opposition to the Obama administration is coalescing into what I would call a Howard Beale Faction, in honor of the choleric anchorman in the movie "Network" whose signature line now seems to have been elevated into philosophy: "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
Not going to take what anymore? Well, whatever. The occasion was Tax Day, April 15, and clearly there was a lot of anger about taxes. That can't have been the only source of ire, however, since President Obama's policies mean that the vast majority of Americans will be paying less in income taxes, not more. In terms of logical self-interest, only the wealthy should have come out to dump their tea bags and wave their pitchforks.
There was anger at hemorrhagic government spending, and this plotline in the mad-as-hell narrative at least made sense. A neutral observer might point out that the president who should have to answer for this year's astronomical $1.7 trillion deficit is George W. Bush, since this is his budget -- and since he's the one who hid the costs of our two faraway wars and demanded a king's ransom to bail out the banks. But it's not as if Obama is some kind of tightwad, given his decision -- which I support -- to push ahead with new spending on health care, education and energy. And anyway, in the worldview of the Howard Beale Faction, the important distinction isn't between one president and the next. It's between "us" and "them.""
Talking Heads.
A Moment of Clarity.
For Your Consideration...
For Your Consideration...
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Thursday, April 16, 2009
"SHIMMY SHIMMY YA!"
FILE UNDER: POLITICS: So Fucking Disco!
EARLIER:
"Talk and talk and talk and talk!"
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Tax Atax | ||||
| ||||
EARLIER:
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Here I Come to Save the Day?
FILE UNDER: Words/A Moment of Clarity/POLITICS AND AMERICA: Now that we've found love, what are we gonna do with it?
Hangin' Tough?
Words.
"When will President Obama fight, and when will he fold? That's not entirely clear --and I'm beginning to worry that there may be a little too much presidential inclination to crumple. For all the chest-thumping about making hard choices and taking on entrenched interests, there has been disturbingly little evidence of the new president's willingness to do that when it discomfits his allies."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Where's the Backbone?
Hangin' Tough?
Words.
"When will President Obama fight, and when will he fold? That's not entirely clear --and I'm beginning to worry that there may be a little too much presidential inclination to crumple. For all the chest-thumping about making hard choices and taking on entrenched interests, there has been disturbingly little evidence of the new president's willingness to do that when it discomfits his allies."
Oh Word?
Words. For Your Consideration...
"The young may now disdain Wall Street -- but what do they know of socialism, past and present? Who even speaks of socialism in America today? The answer, of course, is the demagogic right. According to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and their ilk, Obama is taking America down the Socialist Road. As Benjamin Sarlin has noted on the Web site the Daily Beast, the talkmeisters of the right have linked a doctrine that never commanded much support in America to a president whose approval rating hovers around 60 percent and much higher than that among the young.
Rush and his boys are doing what Gene Debs and his comrades never really could. In tandem with Wall Street, they are building socialism in America."
THE WASHINGTON POST: Revolutionary Rush
"The young may now disdain Wall Street -- but what do they know of socialism, past and present? Who even speaks of socialism in America today? The answer, of course, is the demagogic right. According to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and their ilk, Obama is taking America down the Socialist Road. As Benjamin Sarlin has noted on the Web site the Daily Beast, the talkmeisters of the right have linked a doctrine that never commanded much support in America to a president whose approval rating hovers around 60 percent and much higher than that among the young.
Rush and his boys are doing what Gene Debs and his comrades never really could. In tandem with Wall Street, they are building socialism in America."
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
A Hard Day's Night.
FILE UNDER: Words/A Moment of Clarity.
Working. Like a Dog.
Words. For Your Consideration...
"Former president George W. Bush and some of his White House aides are gathering in Dallas this week to plan the future George W. Bush Policy Institute. There, I guess, they will ponder grand themes and marble foyers, but I propose they begin by simply renaming the place. I suggest naming it the "George W. Bush Institute of Management Failure" and dedicating it to studying how this presidency went so wrong -- a task as big as Texas itself.
...If Bush and his aides do get around to politics, it is my fondest wish that they ask the always voluble Karl Rove -- that latter-day Mark Hanna who was going to create a Republican era to last 30 or 40 years -- what happened. Rove has reduced the Republican Party to himself, Rush Limbaugh and a scattering of red ties in Congress that only he can name. He has so very much to teach us.
Bush's presidency -- rich in lessons -- should keep everyone occupied deep into the night. If it's not too late -- and especially for those already critical of Barack Obama -- let me suggest dessert.
How's humble pie?"
THE WASHINGTON POST: Failures to Communicate
Working. Like a Dog.
Words. For Your Consideration...
"Former president George W. Bush and some of his White House aides are gathering in Dallas this week to plan the future George W. Bush Policy Institute. There, I guess, they will ponder grand themes and marble foyers, but I propose they begin by simply renaming the place. I suggest naming it the "George W. Bush Institute of Management Failure" and dedicating it to studying how this presidency went so wrong -- a task as big as Texas itself.
...If Bush and his aides do get around to politics, it is my fondest wish that they ask the always voluble Karl Rove -- that latter-day Mark Hanna who was going to create a Republican era to last 30 or 40 years -- what happened. Rove has reduced the Republican Party to himself, Rush Limbaugh and a scattering of red ties in Congress that only he can name. He has so very much to teach us.
Bush's presidency -- rich in lessons -- should keep everyone occupied deep into the night. If it's not too late -- and especially for those already critical of Barack Obama -- let me suggest dessert.
How's humble pie?"
Monday, April 13, 2009
Words.
For Your Consideration...
"As something of a comedy of errors, “Hannah Montana” follows the relatively ordinary (in television terms) life of teenage Miley Stewart (Miley Cyrus), who attends public high school, does homework, and performs household chores. Miley’s alter-ego, however, is that of pop star Hannah. Her father and manager, Robby Ray (Billy Ray Cyrus), and smartass older brother, Jackson (the truly hilarious Jason Earles), do their best to keep Miley grounded. Aside from family, the only people that know about Miley’s alter ego are BFF Lilly (Emily Osment) and good buddy Oliver (Mitchel Musso, whose hair I wouldn’t wanna run into in either a dark or bright alley). It’s a fairly banter-driven and, at times, pretty fucking funny television show. While Billy Ray Cyrus performs the acting equivalent of a blow-up doll, daughter Miley has some amazingly deft comic timing. Whether or not the girl actually has any acting range is yet to be determined, but that’s not really the point. What I’m trying to say here is that “Hannah Montana” show ain’t nearly as bad as you’d imagine. Admittedly, I do take slight umbrage with the show’s brief incorporation of a “new Jake Ryan” character because, to paraphrase The Highlander, There Can Be Only One, bitches. Overall, however, the show and its stars are both likable and remarkably self-effacing. Hell, one episode even makes endless fun of Billy Ray’s “Achy Breaky Heart” and that damn mullet, and, really, it’s hard to argue with that sort of sweet justice."
I agree with these comments.
PAJIBA: Hannah Montana: The Movie
"As something of a comedy of errors, “Hannah Montana” follows the relatively ordinary (in television terms) life of teenage Miley Stewart (Miley Cyrus), who attends public high school, does homework, and performs household chores. Miley’s alter-ego, however, is that of pop star Hannah. Her father and manager, Robby Ray (Billy Ray Cyrus), and smartass older brother, Jackson (the truly hilarious Jason Earles), do their best to keep Miley grounded. Aside from family, the only people that know about Miley’s alter ego are BFF Lilly (Emily Osment) and good buddy Oliver (Mitchel Musso, whose hair I wouldn’t wanna run into in either a dark or bright alley). It’s a fairly banter-driven and, at times, pretty fucking funny television show. While Billy Ray Cyrus performs the acting equivalent of a blow-up doll, daughter Miley has some amazingly deft comic timing. Whether or not the girl actually has any acting range is yet to be determined, but that’s not really the point. What I’m trying to say here is that “Hannah Montana” show ain’t nearly as bad as you’d imagine. Admittedly, I do take slight umbrage with the show’s brief incorporation of a “new Jake Ryan” character because, to paraphrase The Highlander, There Can Be Only One, bitches. Overall, however, the show and its stars are both likable and remarkably self-effacing. Hell, one episode even makes endless fun of Billy Ray’s “Achy Breaky Heart” and that damn mullet, and, really, it’s hard to argue with that sort of sweet justice."
I agree with these comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)