“They went through great lengths to obtain these kids,” Janes said. “These are kids that lived really far away. They changed boundaries to fit addresses to make them eligible to play. This was a plan. This was not something they thought about the other day.”
Betrayed the kids.
Chi Trib’s second-day story on Afghan voting is “Observers say 50% turnout in Afghan election a success,” which is a sort of correction on yesterday. Trib’s woman in Kabul has been talking around, relying less on Fatima, who got confused and who’s to blame her?
That was yesterday. Today she has various experts she calls on or listens in on to tell her what’s happening, namely the “chief election officer,” the U.S. ambassador, Al Qaeda’s deputy leader (per Al Jazeera TV), “some people,” the head of “the Afghan Research Evaluation Unit, an independent research group in Kabul” (per AP), someone from “the International Crisis Group think tank,” a 19–yr-old high school student, and an unemployed 53–year-old.
This was a busy day for her, and my guess is she plopped down on a bar stool when her story was filed, for a stiff one, and then to bed.
May I ask, however,
* Chief election officer of what, appointed by whom?
* Whence this Afghan Research Evaluation Unit and who are they, and how are they to be characterized? Objectively, of course.
* Ditto re: the International Crisis Group think tank?
It would be good to know these things, even as one sympathizes with the harried reporter in a foreign land where explosions occur often enough to be noticed. (And indeed, a little Googling finds the latter two with fine web sites — http://www.areu.org.af/ and http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm — that present them as serious operations to be taken seriously.)
Finally, an idea: compare the list of legislators, impossible to sift through for sake of voting responsibly, with our Cook County judges ballot. No comparison, it would be seem, but she does compare 50% voting with far lower percentages voting here, saying or suspecting that they are not to be compared, because for Afghans it’s brand new and we are inured to it — this, by the way, is a comment she gleaned from above-mentioned “some people.”
It would be indeed churlish to ask (a) how many and (b) who; so I will pass over these twin questions in silence.
Chi Trib reports Afghanistan elections, hailed by some as huge success story in implanting democracy, but can’t help itself, drawn as moth to flame to bad-news aspect:
“Afghan elections largely peaceful But turnout isn’t huge and ballots confused” is a soft-lead story (“Fatima picked up a ballot but did not know what to do next”) featuring problems.
Where the hell is the excitement about this? It’s as bad as Jim Warren yawning (and telling us about it) at an impeachment hearing. Who are these detached people and where do they get off shouldering responsibility for informing us about great events?
“[M]illions braved fears” to vote, we are told in the 7th ‘graph. But “some people did not seem nearly as enthusiastic as in last year’s” election, we are told in the 8th. And there were fewer, “it also appeared.” (To whom besides the reporter and in how many places.) And that’s it for the achievement.
This color story, going with “Afghans go to polls First parliamentary election since 1969 is marked by confusion, intimidation reports, apparent low turnout” (a Newsday story) is it as far as the Trib web site goes. The Newsday story probably ran in the day’s hard copy too; I am not going back to the dining room table to find out.
The Newsday lead is businesslike, which is always good but too often not emulated:
PAGHMAN, Afghanistan — Afghans voted yesterday in their first parliamentary elections since 1969, virtually completing the formation of a national government to replace the militant Muslim Taliban regime.
This sounds very good to me, but wait. 2nd ‘graph:
But many Afghans voiced confusion and uncertainty about the process. The day lacked the confident, celebratory atmosphere of October’s presidential election, and turnout appeared to be lower than last year, monitoring groups said.
At least he cites monitors, presumably placed around the country. It’s a cautious tale, with “journalists and election monitors” nationwide reporting cases of voters not knowing how to vote. And the winners could be former oppressors, as a Paghman strong man of whom “a street vendor” says a criminal courtroom should be his location, not a ballot. Otherwise, the reporter cites Human Rights Watch, the vendor presumably giving color to a story that in sum alleges widespread fraud without saying so.
Why not? Insufficient evidence? And who are the monitors? Not Jimmy Carter, I trust. And Human Rights Watch? Is it another International Red Cross, whose top man tore into “selfish” U.S. at tsunami time? I’m suspicious of international bodies, period.
In any case, this Newsday and echoing Tribune (color) reporting is rather in contrast with “A HAPPY DAY IN AFGHANISTAN” at www.instapundit.com, where we are linked to a CanWest News Service story out of Kandahar, “’Optimistic’ day at polls,” opening with
Afghanistan’s elections Sunday proved a mostly peaceful anticlimax to recent violence, appearing more like a national festival than a national crisis.
and picking up four ‘graphs later:
What patrolling Canadian soldiers witnessed instead [of widespread violence] on Sunday was a virtual national holiday. Afghans casually strolled down the streets of their two major cities after all non-essential traffic was ordered off the road, on their way to do something they thought would ensure a brighter future — vote.
“Everyone is so happy. It’s like we are waiting for Christmas to come,” said Abdullah Shahood, a 22-year-old poll observer for candidate Abdul Razziq.
“Everyone is optimistic.”
Oh? Tell it to your basic Mainstreamer, typified too often by Chi Trib. If an early “Where the hell” in an commentary such as this is a betraying of one’s opinion, that’s o.k. when suspicion of MSM outlets has reached unprecedented levels.
Chi Trib reports Afghanistan elections, hailed by some as huge success story in implanting democracy, but can’t help itself, drawn as moth to flame to bad-news aspect:
“Afghan elections largely peaceful But turnout isn’t huge and ballots confused” is a soft-lead story (“Fatima picked up a ballot but did not know what to do next”) featuring problems.
Where the hell is the excitement about this? It’s as bad as Jim Warren yawning (and telling us about it) at an impeachment hearing. Who are these detached people and where do they get off shouldering responsibility for informing us about great events?
“[M]illions braved fears” to vote, we are told in the 7th ‘graph. But “some people did not seem nearly as enthusiastic as in last year’s” election, we are told in the 8th. And there were fewer, “it also appeared.” (To whom besides the reporter and in how many places.) And that’s it for the achievement.
This color story, going with “Afghans go to polls First parliamentary election since 1969 is marked by confusion, intimidation reports, apparent low turnout” (a Newsday story) is it as far as the Trib web site goes. The Newsday story probably ran in the day’s hard copy too; I am not going back to the dining room table to find out.
The Newsday lead is businesslike, which is always good but too often not emulated:
PAGHMAN, Afghanistan — Afghans voted yesterday in their first parliamentary elections since 1969, virtually completing the formation of a national government to replace the militant Muslim Taliban regime.
This sounds very good to me, but wait. 2nd ‘graph:
But many Afghans voiced confusion and uncertainty about the process. The day lacked the confident, celebratory atmosphere of October’s presidential election, and turnout appeared to be lower than last year, monitoring groups said.
At least he cites monitors, presumably placed around the country. It’s a cautious tale, with “journalists and election monitors” nationwide reporting cases of voters not knowing how to vote. And the winners could be former oppressors, as a Paghman strong man of whom “a street vendor” says a criminal courtroom should be his location, not a ballot. Otherwise, the reporter cites Human Rights Watch, the vendor presumably giving color to a story that in sum alleges widespread fraud without saying so.
Why not? Insufficient evidence? And who are the monitors? Not Jimmy Carter, I trust. And Human Rights Watch? Is it another International Red Cross, whose top man tore into “selfish” U.S. at tsunami time? I’m suspicious of international bodies, period.
In any case, this Newsday and echoing Tribune (color) reporting is rather in contrast with “A HAPPY DAY IN AFGHANISTAN” at www.instapundit.com, where we are linked to a CanWest News Service story out of Kandahar, “’Optimistic’ day at polls,” opening with
Afghanistan’s elections Sunday proved a mostly peaceful anticlimax to recent violence, appearing more like a national festival than a national crisis.
and picking up four ‘graphs later:
What patrolling Canadian soldiers witnessed instead [of widespread violence] on Sunday was a virtual national holiday. Afghans casually strolled down the streets of their two major cities after all non-essential traffic was ordered off the road, on their way to do something they thought would ensure a brighter future — vote.
“Everyone is so happy. It’s like we are waiting for Christmas to come,” said Abdullah Shahood, a 22-year-old poll observer for candidate Abdul Razziq.
“Everyone is optimistic.”
Oh? Tell it to your basic Mainstreamer, typified too often by Chi Trib. If an early “Where the hell” in an commentary such as this is a betraying of one’s opinion, that’s o.k. when suspicion of MSM outlets has reached unprecedented levels.
Dino Dini’s barber shop is in its last days. He’s retiring after 40 years at 66. So are his barbers Frank, 89 (!), and Tony, 69. It’s here and here. That didn’t keep recruiters away. Two were there this afternoon, checking on their plans: retirement, retirement, retirement. So the recruiters were going away empty-handed. What then of the shop? Dino has had four or five inquiries, none of which have led to a lease with Kehoe & Co., the building managers. The building, a big one, on the SW corner of Marion & Chicago, was bought a few years ago by a group of investors. There apparently is no replacement barber shop in its future.
Meanwhile, a half mile south, also on Marion — on the pedestrian mall, from Lake to the tracks — rents are going up, says one merchant, and the smaller shops will probably be moving. A very big condo development is going up just beyond the viaduct, on the SE corner of Marion & South Blvd. Its units will not be going for peanuts. Its residents will be flocking to nearby shops which will reflect their ability to pay more.
Times are a-changing in OP. Weep and wail if you must, but there’s nothing anyone can do about it, not while there’s a tax base to keep in mind for our schools and parks and library, to name three OP-required amenities of the first water. Goodbye, Dino. Enjoy your retirement. And haircut-seekers, take note: Saturday the 17th is the last day. Dino will take his chair. The other two are pretty well spoken for by loyal customers, a number of whom shook hands with Dino and the other two on their way out this afternoon.
Alderman Natarus of the 42nd ward took a header yesterday in council chambers during debate on whether to call for immediate pull-out from Iraq. Sun-Times, relying on the highly professional Fran Spielman, gives the debate its own story. (The alderman is o.k., by the way.) She quotes opponents of the resolution — it passed 29–9 — to good effect:
Balcer of the 11th (the Daley ward, for non-Chicagoans) recalled “demoralizing” protests when he was serving in Viet Nam, from which he “still carries scars.” Cardenas of the 12th said, “We can’t turn our backs [on our troops] and say . . . that the lives that were lost were for no reason.” Burke of the 14th, saying he had opposed the war from the start, said, “anything we do to dilute or . . . undermine [soldiers’] morale is wrong.” Preckwinkle of the 4th (liberal Hyde Park) and Stone of the 50th were quoted in support of the resolution, Stone having oddly changed his mind when he saw 25 coffins being returned to Cleveland — as if he did not know soldiers die in war.
Chi Trib, on the other hand, collapsed the alderman-collapsing and pull-out vote into one story (Trib usually does not give the same weight to local coverage as S-T) and also quoted both sides but not Balcer the ‘Nam vet with bad memories of protest, characterizing the Burke statement with a “Burke fumed” (earlier “declared”) when the eminently useful “said” was applied to all others. In fact, it’s even “said” when Cardenas yelled “Call 9–11!” when Natarus fell.
It’s a little thing that injects color in the midst of data. Anyhow, Burke fumes a lot, doesn’t he? He generally looks as if he’s about to fume or just did. It’s his nature. Between the two stories, S-T’s is more interesting, though the pull-out ordinance sponsor, Moore of the 49th (Loyola U. territory), gave his rationale in the Trib for all to cheer or jeer: “It is the obligation of elected officials closest to the people,” he said [declared? noted? proclaimed? intoned?] to goad president and Congress to do the presumably right thing.
Yes, and it’s also a neat distraction from corruption in city hall. Not that Natarus collapsing isn’t too, but it’s hard to plan that.
Alderman Natarus of the 42nd ward took a header yesterday in council chambers during debate on whether to call for immediate pull-out from Iraq. Sun-Times, relying on the highly professional Fran Spielman, gives the debate its own story. (The alderman is o.k., by the way.) She quotes opponents of the resolution — it passed 29–9 — to good effect:
Balcer of the 11th (the Daley ward, for non-Chicagoans) recalled “demoralizing” protests when he was serving in Viet Nam, from which he “still carries scars.” Cardenas of the 12th said, “We can’t turn our backs [on our troops] and say . . . that the lives that were lost were for no reason.” Burke of the 14th, saying he had opposed the war from the start, said, “anything we do to dilute or . . . undermine [soldiers’] morale is wrong.” Preckwinkle of the 4th (liberal Hyde Park) and Stone of the 50th were quoted in support of the resolution, Stone having oddly changed his mind when he saw 25 coffins being returned to Cleveland — as if he did not know soldiers die in war.
Chi Trib, on the other hand, collapsed the alderman-collapsing and pull-out vote into one story (Trib usually does not give the same weight to local coverage as S-T) and also quoted both sides but not Balcer the ‘Nam vet with bad memories of protest, characterizing the Burke statement with a “Burke fumed” (earlier “declared”) when the eminently useful “said” was applied to all others. In fact, it’s even “said” when Cardenas yelled “Call 9–11!” when Natarus fell.
It’s a little thing that injects color in the midst of data. Anyhow, Burke fumes a lot, doesn’t he? He generally looks as if he’s about to fume or just did. It’s his nature. Between the two stories, S-T’s is more interesting, though the pull-out ordinance sponsor, Moore of the 49th (Loyola U. territory), gave his rationale in the Trib for all to cheer or jeer: “It is the obligation of elected officials closest to the people,” he said [declared? noted? proclaimed? intoned?] to goad president and Congress to do the presumably right thing.
Yes, and it’s also a neat distraction from corruption in city hall. Not that Natarus collapsing isn’t too, but it’s hard to plan that.
So what do you think, Chicago Newspaper readers? Would you like Sun-Times and Trib exchanging front pages on the day before publication, as NY Times and Wash Post have been doing (secretly) for 10 years? Editor & Publisher has the story. Something in the back of my 73–year-old mind with 63 years-plus newspaper-reading experience tells me that you would not, but rather that it’s scandalous that it happened. What think you?
Later: Reader Bill asks whatever happened to the scoop concept? To which I noted that the Editor & P story discussed it amazingly as reflecting long-time “rivalry” between NYT and Wash Post, but it’s a price-fixing story in my book.
So what do you think, Chicago Newspaper readers? Would you like Sun-Times and Trib exchanging front pages on the day before publication, as NY Times and Wash Post have been doing (secretly) for 10 years? Editor & Publisher has the story. Something in the back of my 73–year-old mind with 63 years-plus newspaper-reading experience tells me that you would not, but rather that it’s scandalous that it happened. What think you?
Later: Reader Bill asks whatever happened to the scoop concept? To which I noted that the Editor & P story discussed it amazingly as reflecting long-time “rivalry” between NYT and Wash Post, but it’s a price-fixing story in my book.
Dominican U.’s easement-seeking enters a new phase, as here, where we read in Wed. Journal of OP&RF:
With the belief that any legal uncertainty over the ownership of a small swatch of wooded land along Thatcher Avenue has been resolved in its favor, Dominican University will move ahead with zoning applications to build a parking garage and classroom building on the west side of its River Forest campus.
. . .
At the heart of the matter is village approval for a driveway curb cut along Thatcher Avenue between Division Street and Greenfield Avenue. If that driveway is OKd, it would allow new access to the west side of the campus and lead to construction of a 550-car parking garage and a new Academic Building.
Legal advice and Forest Preserve District support in favor of DU is bolstered by heavyweight political support from county commissioner and Elmwood Park mayor Peter Sylvestri. River Forest village administrator Chuck Biondo says RF is aboard. It’s all in the wake of extensive protesting by OP resident Victor Guarino and others who argued last March that the land belongs to the Forest Preserve: “There hasn’t been a thorough enough study of this.” Characterizing the current turn of events as “very complicated,” Guarino insisted that the Cook County Board of Commissioners, which administers the Forest Preserve district, has never told the university that it owns the property.
“[Board president John] Stroger said [last] Wednesday that he never told Dominican University that they owned that land,” said Guarino. “We’re calling for an independent legal counsel to review this.”
Stroger doesn’t turn up in the latest story, being perhaps busy with other things such as allegations of corruption on the board he heads.
==============================
Elsewhere we read that “Planning is socialism,” a point of view that runs against the Oak Park and maybe River Forest grain these days. It’s at http://www.mises.org/story/1910, which Calif. Assemblyman Ray Haynes [raysahay@aol.com], representing parts of Western Riverside County and Northern San Diego County, says in part:
Anyone who thinks that planning for “growth” is anything other than a exercise in futility is still experiencing the mind-altering visions that their college chemicals visited upon him or her so many years ago. Today’s planners meet in little rooms, draw pretty pictures on paper maps, use the prettiest crayons they can find, and — whamo — the city has a plan. Wonder and utopia are supposed to follow, and never again will the city experience traffic congestion or cosmic disharmony.
Ouch and double ouch from OP, where plans proliferate. Haynes gives chapter and verse on how plans don’t work in California, concluding:
We know that socialism is a failed experiment, as demonstrated by the failure of the Soviet Union, socialism’s most devoted practitioner. My socialist colleagues in the Legislature, however, think that they are smarter than the Russians and that socialism will work here in California if we just have the right plan. The most recent polls tell us that the public is not satisfied with how we are doing our job. Maybe we should try something different, like freedom and free enterprise, the principles that made this country great.
As they said in the (mostly imagined) 60s barricades, right on!
Blithe Spirit 