Why Aren't We As Stupid And Fearful?

Amanda Marcotte (a great blogger from Austin) has a few ideas about something that I've been wondering about for a while. From where I've been sitting, Americans in the latter half of the Clinton administration through the Bush years have been extremely easy to manipulate, mostly through fear. I always assumed that it was because people in general are pretty stupid. So now I'm wondering whether there are more smart people that I thought, or if the smart people are just more engaged.

Here's a clip from Amanda's post:

...one of the most interesting and underrated things that Obama did was quietly but decisively demonstrate that you don’t have to fit the badly-dressed fishing and chewing stereotype to be a Real Man. And in doing so, I think he woke up the right wing and mainstream media to something that should have been obvious, which is that the redneck set and their worshippers don’t actually have a lock on secure masculinity. It’s really kind of silly, because the right wing noise machine and their mainstream enablers knew for a fact that the way to stir up the troops was to provoke those insecurities---imply that someone was out to rob them of their manhood or provoke insecurities about being ignorant and provincial by calling liberals “elitist"---but despite this, I guess they must have honestly not realized that said insecurities were easily provoked because the people who have them are, duh, insecure.

But America is getting more urban, more diverse, and we’re even getting exposed to more things, and it’s changing the equation. As each generation comes up, fewer of them feel left out of the sexual revolution. (I went to a condom couture show on campus a few weeks ago, and even the College Republicans had entered a dress. Made of condoms. This should make their elders realize they’re losing the war rapidly.) And frankly, there’s a lot more models for how to be a Real Man nowadays, despite mainstream media’s brave attempts to shame men who shower and dress nice by calling them “metrosexuals”. Geeks aren’t excluded from the manhood club, not when the most famous business owners in the country aren’t car manufacturers so much as the guys who brought you your computers and iPods and video game systems. Intelligent, urbane men are a constant right wing target for masculinity shaming, but let’s face it, said men have a couple aces in the pocket, namely they aren’t little babies that are scared of dealing with women as equals and they win the sexual prowess contest without even breaking a sweat, and good luck defining masculinity without that.

I don't think that she's completely answered the question (for instance, she doesn't address the whole "there's a terrorist under your bed" thing). This country has made a pretty significant shift in attitude in a remarkably short time (although sometimes hard to tell, living in Texas). But it's nice to see I am not the only one wondering about this.

Sotamayor's Refusal To Legislate From Bench Could Prompt Conservative Backlash!!

From Fox News:

The chief concern is her position in the 2009 Maloney v. Cuomo case, in which the court examined a claim by a New York attorney that a New York law that prohibited possession of nunchucks violated his Second Amendment rights. The Appeals Court affirmed the lower court's decision that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.

The ruling explained that it was "settled law" that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government might seek on individual gun rights.

Really?!?! this is the best they have?? She upheld a lower court ruling instead of engaging in the dreaded "judicial activism". Wow - Supreme Court pick #1 (of ??) looking like an easy confirm.

U-Neek

Summer's almost here. Let the reggae flow!
Eek-A-Mouse!!

What Glennzilla Said

Remember this when you hear that Sotomayor engaged in "judicial activism" in the Ricci case:

...And the idea that her decision in Ricci demonstrates some sort of radicalism -- when she was simply affirming the decision of a federal district judge, was part of a unanimous circuit panel in doing so, was supported by a majority of her fellow Circuit judges who refused to re-hear the case, and will, by all accounts, have at least several current Supreme Court Justices side with her -- is frivolous on its face.

President Obama Calls For Release of Aung San Suu Kyi

Today:

Making his first statement on the trial of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, President Obama issued a stern statement late Tuesday calling on the Burmese government to release her "immediately and unconditionally."
...
The Obama administration has been conducting a high-profile review of policy toward Burma, including the effectiveness of sanctions. But the sudden trial of Suu Kyi, just as her detention was set to end, has instead inspired calls for increased sanctions.

"Suu Kyi's continued detention, isolation, and show trial based on spurious charges cast serious doubt on the Burmese regime's willingness to be a responsible member of the international community," Obama said, adding the government had "an important opporttunity... to demonstrate that it respects its own laws and its own people."

Burma Democracy and Development has the full text. Another excerpt:

By her actions, Aung San Suu Kyi has represented profound patriotism, sacrifice, and the vision of a democratic and prosperous Burma. It is time for the Burmese government to drop all charges against Aung San Suu Kyi and unconditionally release her and her fellow political prisoners. Such an action would be an affirmative and significant step on Burma’s part to begin to restore its standing in the eyes of the United States and the world community and to move toward a better future for its people.

Whacked-out Lib General Petraeus

What's his take on closing GITMO?

"With respect to Guantanamo," Petraeus added, "I think that the closure in a responsible manner, obviously one that is certainly being worked out now by the Department of Justice -- I talked to the Attorney General the other day [and] they have a very intensive effort ongoing to determine, indeed, what to do with the detainees who are left, how to deal with them in a legal way, and if continued incarceration is necessary -- again, how to take that forward. But doing that in a responsible manner, I think, sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees."

Elections Have Consequences

This is a nice summary of the change as exhibited yesterday