Florida Election Ballot: What happens when Jeb Bush and Diebold put their heads together?
Daily Archives: 10 Oct 04
R.I.P. Jacques Derrida?
![//graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/10/10/international/Derrida75.jpg' cannot be displayed]](https://i0.wp.com/graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/10/10/international/Derrida75.jpg "Derrida, R.I.P.")
Is Derrida dead? “We know only two things. We do not know. And M Derrida is in no position to enlighten us.” I hope this cheeky Times of London comment is not the only thing that passes for an obituary for Derrida in that august periodical, but it would not surprise me if it were. The central assertion of Derrida’s deconstructionism, as I understand it, that the inherent uncertainties of language defeat any intended clear meaning of the author of a text and leave it with ambiguous significance has been maddening to those who maintain a more classical ideal of truth and have a certain authoritativeness to uphold. Is it with absurdist, ironic or reverent intent that a paragraph of this two-paragraph glyph on Derrida is devoted to (perhaps the ultimate audacious truth hacker) Alan Sokol, and written in what I expect is a parody of postmodern French impenetrable prose?
Kerry Haters for Kerry
“Are you going to vote for John Kerry even though you find him unpleasant, annoying, arrogant, waffling, misguided, or just generally unappealing in some profound way? Then you’ve come to the right place! We’re Kerry Haters for Kerry — perhaps his largest constituency! No need to hide in the Kerryhating closet anymore while you pretend to everyone that he’ll be a great president. Here you are among friends. You can speak freely and honestly. You can admit: ‘He’s awful! And I’m for him!’ Each of us has his or her reasons for arriving at this position…”
These people may tout their tongue-in-cheek sense of humor but they’ll be tonguing out of the other side of their mouth if their emphasis contributes to defeating the effort to evict Bush.
Truth Stranger Than Strangelove
“Dr. Strangelove dared to suggest — with yucks! — that our top generals might be bonkers and that our well-designed system for preserving the peace was in fact a doomsday machine. What few people knew, at the time and since, was just how accurate this film was. Its premise, plotline, some of the dialogue, even its wildest characters eerily resembled the policies, debates and military leaders of the day.” — Fred Kaplan (New York Times)
New Google Service May Strain Old Ties in Bookselling
“Google Print, the new search engine that allows consumers to search the content of books online, could help touch off an important shift in the balance of power between companies that produce books and those that sell them, publishing executives said here on Thursday…
The new service would allow users of Google’s main search engine to search simultaneously billions of Web pages and the texts of hundreds of thousands of books for information on a given subject. They search works by looking for words or phrases in the scanned digital images of the pages of books that publishers have provided to Google.
For each book found, a user would see several pages of the book with the phrase or subject of the search highlighted. The page would also offer links to several online retailers, where the book could be bought. Publishers do not pay to participate in the program; rather, Google would make money from the service by selling advertising on the search pages, and it would share those revenues with the publishing companies.” (New York Times)
The Faith-Based Missile Shield
“The Bush administration’s exorbitantly wasteful missile defense system is about to be formally activated – just in time for Election Day.” (New York Times editorial)
Can Prayers Heal?
Critics Say Studies Go Past Science’s Reach. “The government has spent $2.3 million in the past 4 years to study something that critics say has nothing to do with science.” (New York Times)
The State vs. the Great Man
“…If Cheney seems too-focused on state-sponsored terrorism, Kerry and Edwards at least seem too focused on what might be called the ‘Great Man Theory of Terrorism,’ placing much too much public emphasis on the capture of Osama bin Laden– as if that would make the al Qaeda network (and its future imitators) wither away. … P.S.: I don’t think Kerry really buys this theory–he also said, in Debate #1
‘I believe that a fresh start, new credibility, a president who can understand what we have to do to reach out to the Muslim world to make it clear that this is not, you know — Osama bin Laden uses the invasion of Iraq in order to go out to people and say that America has declared war on Islam.
We need to be smarter about now we wage a war on terror. We need to deny them the recruits.’
That’s why I’m for him. But the opportunistic public focus on bin Laden himself is off-putting. … ” — Mickey Kaus (Slate )
Kerry Haters for Kerry
“Are you going to vote for John Kerry even though you find him unpleasant, annoying, arrogant, waffling, misguided, or just generally unappealing in some profound way? Then you’ve come to the right place! We’re Kerry Haters for Kerry — perhaps his largest constituency! No need to hide in the Kerryhating closet anymore while you pretend to everyone that he’ll be a great president. Here you are among friends. You can speak freely and honestly. You can admit: ‘He’s awful! And I’m for him!’ Each of us has his or her reasons for arriving at this position…”
These people may tout their tongue-in-cheek sense of humor but they’ll be tonguing out of the other side of their mouth if their emphasis contributes to defeating the effort to evict Bush.
