The Incredible Shrinking Server

I spent some time this afternoon compacting the seven Frontier databases that hold the weblogs on Buzzword.Com. Weblog publishers should see improved performance on page loads and other requests.

Also, I have added two links to the sidebar that help promote weblogs on the server: top 100 rankings and a list of recently updated weblogs. I suspect that the latter needs some more debugging. Weblogs should appear on the list within minutes of being updated.

Buzzword users: If you'd like to help bring more search engine traffic to sites in the free weblog community, add these two links to your site's blogroll. Google has been slow to restore the page rank of weblogs since the move from Weblogs.Com, so I'm looking for ways to promote active sites with more links.

To make changes to a Manila site's blogroll, log in and click the Edit button below the list of links.

Manila · 2004/10/28 · Comment · Link

Dirty, Scurrilous Lesbians

MSNBC political analyst Lawrence O'Donnell had a Howard Beale moment on Scarborough Country Friday, calling Swift Boat Veterans for Slander founder John O'Neill a lying liar who lies around a hundred times.

O'Donnell was just getting warmed up, though. Here's the transcript, picked up after O'Neill was punted and the show turned to the subject of Mary Cheney's publicly debated lesbianism:

GUEST HOST PAT BUCHANAN: ... would it not have been wise for Kerry himself, when the controversy came up over the Cheney daughter -- we were talking about it for six, seven days -- if Kerry himself had just moved, look, if anyone's taken offense, I apologize; let's move on?

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: Yes. I now think the way that whole Cheney daughter thing played out, that that would have been the right line, that -- suggesting surprise at the offense, but if you've taken the offense, I'm sorry.

BURKMAN: Do you think it's OK that they attacked Cheney's daughter?

O'DONNELL: They didn't attack the daughter.

GOP STRATEGIST JACK BURKMAN: Well, do you think what they said is OK?

O'DONNELL: Yes.

BURKMAN: Is it?

O'DONNELL: Yes.

(CROSSTALK)

O'DONNELL: She's a lesbian and she has lesbian sex.

BURKMAN: But is appropriate to call attention, for a presidential candidate...

O'DONNELL: The reason I know that is that her father told me.

(CROSSTALK)

O'DONNELL: Her father and mother told me she's a lesbian and has lesbian sex.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: That's not the issue.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: That's not the issue. My question is, do you think it's appropriate for a person seeking the highest office in the world to raise that in a presidential debate?

O'DONNELL: Because I believe there is nothing negative about lesbianism, and I'm very much in favor of as much lesbianism as lesbians want to create in the world, and as many of lesbian Cheney family members as they want to have is all fine by me, I see nothing negative.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: I'll tell you, Pat. Even Bill Clinton and Al Gore -- Al Gore, who in the 2000 campaign use every dirty and scurrilous tactic known to man, they did not...

O'DONNELL: Dirty, scurrilous lesbians. Dirty, scurrilous lesbians.

BURKMAN: It's nothing to do with that. He did not attack the children of the candidates. Even Bill Clinton and Al Gore did not do that.

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: Let's take a look at something else.

O'DONNELL: What's the attack in the word lesbian?

In these bitterly fractious times, I think it's important to find issues in which partisans can set aside their differences and join in agreement. I stand today with O'Donnell, and ask you to stand with me, in strong support for as much lesbianism as lesbians want to create in the world.

Politics · 2004/10/27 · Comment · Link

GOP's Get-Out-the-Vote Drive

The New York Times describes a plan by the Ohio Republican Party to pay thousands of people to stalk polling places and turn away as many prospective voters as possible:

The Ohio Republicans also plan to have people in more than 3,600 polling places, mostly in heavily Democratic urban areas, to challenge the right of people to vote on Election Day itself.

Leaving aside the fact that this is obscene, I can't imagine that it will succeed at doing anything but angering voters who witness people being strong-armed out of their vote.

When you couple efforts like this with the Bush/Cheney campaign's weird "loyalty oath" requirement, which prevented undecided and persuadable voters from attending their rallies, I think we may be looking at one of the worst-run campaigns by an incumbent president in U.S. history.

Karl Rove's reputation as a genius has an expiration date of 11/2/2004.

Politics · 2004/10/27 · 2 COMMENTS · Link

God Bless Ronan Tynan

The only thing I miss about the Yankees' absence from the playoffs is the performance of "God Bless America" by Ronan Tynan. Having him perform so often and so well at Yankee Stadium reminds me of the Philadelphia Flyers bringing out Kate Smith to sing it as a good-luck charm.

The U.S. could significantly reduce noise pollution by making "God Bless America" the national anthem. I endure 500 excruciating renditions of the "Star-Spangled Banner" a year on streaming baseball games. Only in the cacophony of battle could someone think that such a jarring collection of notes constitutes music.

Tynan, described as "renowned Irish Tenor Ronan Tynan" so often it sounds like his legal name, has a personal story I'd never heard in spite of these performances. He's a double amputee, physician, and Paralympics athlete who began singing seriously at age 33.

Politics · Music · Sports · 2004/10/25 · 13 COMMENTS · Link

Thou Shalt Not Anger The Times

Today's New York Times includes a letter I wrote to ombudsman Daniel Okrent about his decision to out a reader who sent a violently hostile e-mail to political reporter Adam Nagourney:

I was disappointed by your decision to reveal the name of the offensive e-mail correspondent.

The easiest thing for any newspaper columnist to do is to quote his most abusive critics. It's a win-win: no one would be persuaded by the person's horrendous comments, and it builds sympathy for the columnist.

On the other hand, if the columnist only quoted reasonable people whose criticism is well informed, it would be more of a challenge to refute them.

I don't think a readers' representative should ridicule his readers. Readers need to know that the ombudsman is on their side. If he adopts the same "us against them" bunker mentality as other journalists, he should find another position.

The reader, Steve Schwenk, has received a barrage of abusive e-mail and phone calls, a circumstance that Okrent undoubtedly knew would happen as a result of his column.

In retrospect, I was too charitable to Okrent, who clearly doesn't have the temperament to be an ombudsman. The job requires a herculean amount of patience, as I learned observing the work of Phil Record at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

At the Telegram, Record wrote a daily column for internal use at the paper in addition to a weekly column for the public. Even in the internal column, I can't recall a single occasion when he roughed up a hot-headed reader for an inappropriate remark, in spite of hearing from cranks all the time.

Okrent has now twice compared verbally mistreating a Times reporter to desecrating a church, including this remark to BusinessWeek:

... someone who goes out at night and paints a swastika on the door of a synagogue doesn't want it written about either.

In defense of the sacred sensibilities of reporters, Okrent claims an obligation to hold readers to "public responsibility" for their communication with the newspaper. That's an odd niche for a readers' representative to carve out for himself, unless he's more interested in protecting the paper from critics than challenging its mistakes.

Note: This entry has been updated to remove the statement that Schwenk is a weblogger. He does not have a blog.

Journalism · 2004/10/24 · 35 COMMENTS · Link

Brian Carnell, Salon Subscriber

Last year, I announced a Salon contest on Workbench:

I will buy a Salon subscription for one of the vultures who has circled the magazine for years in premature anticipation of its demise. The winner will be someone whose criticism of the publication is weirdly personal, unnaturally angry, outstandingly venomous, or ideally a combination of all three.

Catching up today, I awarded the prize to the fetchingly bilious weblogger Brian Carnell. No one combines his passionate loathing for the liberal online magazine with encyclopedic dedication to the subject. He has lamented the publication's low ethical standards, lax math skills, and freewheeling accounting practices, among other offenses.

If Salon ever folds, Carnell will be the first to post a hearty "I told you so," a realized prediction that would be more impressive if he hadn't been making it for years.

But I don't want to rob him of this achievement, and it is a matter of public record that he'll cherish this gift for the next 12 months, or the closure of Salon, whichever comes first:

I have to confess that I'm a regular Salon reader, and while I'll miss the site when it dies (and it is going to die), I've only got two words for David Talbot: good riddance.

Salon Blogs · 2004/10/22 · 2 COMMENTS · Link

Weapons of Mass Hilarity

In March, President Bush participated in the Radio and Television Correspondents Dinner, a traditional event in Washington where the president provides laughs at the expense of himself and members of the administration.

His choice of comedic material was deeply offensive: a Lettermanesque slide show depicting his futile personal hunt for weapons of mass destruction under tables and desks in the White House. I couldn't believe that he was laughing off a mistake while it was killing or maiming thousands of U.S. troops. Was the Tet Offensive comedy gold for LBJ in 1968?

David Corn, a columnist for The Nation, was present at the event and similarly unamused: "I wondered what the spouse, child or parent of a soldier killed in Iraq would have felt if they had been watching C-SPAN and saw the commander-in-chief mocking the supposed justification for the war that claimed their loved ones."

A new campaign ad from Win Back Respect answers Corn's question.

Politics · 2004/10/21 · Comment · Link

Read More Entries