Former President Jimmy Carter weasels out of his previous comments regarding the Bush Administration:

“This administration’s foreign policy, compared to President Nixon’s, was much worse,” Carter said on NBC. “I wasn’t comparing this administration with other administrations back through history but just with President Nixon’s.” (from The Boston Globe)

In contrast to that statement, here’s what he said to the interviewer:

Carter called the Bush administration “the worst in history” when it comes to foreign affairs and accused the president of abandoning “America’s basic values.” (from Arkansas Democrat Gazette, audio here)

Now President Carter’s right, he was responding to a question about a comparison between the Nixon and Bush administrations.  But what he said, “this administration has been the worst in hist … worst in history,” was clear-cut and patently directed specifically at the current administration, not in comparison to another administration, but in contrast to the arc of the American Presidency.  It was unequivocal and not particularly subject to misinterpretation.

Now I happen to agree with what Mr. Carter said originally; this administration had been an almost unqualified disaster, both for the United States and for the world as a whole.  But as important as that is that President Carter’s not taking responsibility for his statements.  He’s dissembling when he says “My remarks were maybe careless or misinterpreted, but I wasn’t comparing the overall administration and I was certainly not talking personally about any president” (Globe) and it hurts his credibility in my eyes and perhaps on the larger stage.  If he felt he was wrong to say that then fine, he should admit he made a mistake, and apologize if appropriate.  But he shouldn’t try to change what he said to get out of taking responsibility for his words – that’s too similar to what members of the current administration are wont to do.  Perhaps the White House is right when they say that Carter is increasingly irrelevant, and perhaps he should constrain himself to his work in Habitat for Humanity and the Carter Center, where he’s done some real good, and where his words are less likely to get him in hot water.

On a side note, my congratulations and thanks to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette and Frank Lockwood and whatever other editors or publishers were involved in the decision to post the audio so we could hear President Carter’s words for ourselves.  I wonder if they would have done so if the audio would have reflected less favorably on themselves or not been quite as newsworthy – there’s the real test of journalistic openness.

Almost two-thirds of those polled said … actions in Iraq showed … was “stubborn and unwilling to admit mistakes”. (From here)

Who might that be in reference to?  Of course it’s a reference to George W. Bush, but it sounds like Hillary Rodham Clinton to me.

 Interesting and effective illustration of our responses to victimization.  The author had my responses pegged exactly correctly.  A little manipulative overall, but worth reading….

In any situation in which someone is being victimized, there are only six roles you and I can play.

• Perpetuator
• Collaborator
• Victim
• Bystander
• Resistor
• Rescuer

This is the total extent of our choices. Whether we welcome our role or not, simply by being aware of the situation means we have taken on one of these roles. The only good news here is that we have a choice as to which role we will play.  (from: Your Only Choice Is Which Role You will Play / John Edwards ‘08 Blog)

Ah yes, American holiday spirit: 

Jensen was ordered to take the [peace-sign shaped] wreath down when some residents in her 200-home subdivision saw it as a protest of the Iraq war. Bob Kearns, president of the board, also said some saw it as a symbol of Satan. (From: Truce declared in peace wreath battle – CNN.com)

In the season of Peace on Earth and Good Will Towards Men, we have whole neighborhoods declaring hanging a peace sign on your house is not just unpatriotic and divisive, but also downright Satanic.

No comment from the neighborhood association board, two of whom changed their phone numbers to unlisted ones on Monday.

Yes, peace on earth; what a radical notion.

“Tony Blair has unveiled plans to introduce nearly 80 ‘Supernannies’ to help parents tame unruly children.

Up to £4 million is to be spent on creating a network of experts in a bid to tackle the roots of anti-social behaviour, according to the Prime Minister.” (Source: Telegraph | News | Blair proposes network of ‘Supernannies’)

Guess I was wrong about “anti-social” being code for “illegal”.

Later though, good old Tony goes on to reinforce the big-brotherism in British government:

“Laying the ground for the publication of proposals to force more fathers and mothers to attend parenting classes, Mr Blair said that an ‘overwhelming majority’ of people would welcome outside assistance.”

Hmm.

I’m not 100% sure I disagree with the usefulness of mandatory parenting classes; there are an awful lot of parents who could benefit from them out there.  On the other hand, I’m sure a lot of people would say that I’m one of those parents, and I’m 100% sure there’s no good solution to determine who should decide who’s a good parent and who’s not.  Not that that’ll stop old Tony.

Dave Winer:

If its perfectly targeted, it isn’t advertising, its information. Information is welcome, advertising is offensive.

Well, while I don’t agree that all advertising is offensive, I absolutely agree that commercial information perfectly tailored to me is just that: information. It’s no longer an ad.

I also agree with what Dave says further down in this piece that “target” is the wrong metaphor. As I seem to recall hearing Doc say (though I can’t find the reference): “I’m not a target.”

ShelleyTheRepublican.com: Linux: A European threat to our computers (by Tristan)

On this website you will find many information on how to support America

On this website you will also find more ignorance than I thought could possibly fit inside one brain. This individual's mind is so far closed to reality that even the fact that Blogger is hosted on Linux server is impossible.

Even if this isn't a spoof and these folks are for real, there are some great trolls in the comments.

"It sucks to be Frodo."

How profound.

Lots of really good commentary regarding the GoodMail solution and Esther Dyson’s op-ed piece in Dave’s comments. Unfortunately, aside from a brief visit from GoodMail’s founder, it’s been pretty one-sided.
This does have the feel of an answer for the privileged. For what it’s worth, I’m all for a better spam solution, but there are alternatives that can make it more difficult for the true spammers without making the rest of us bear the burden. SenderID, for all its weaknesses, comes to mind.

From Deconstructing the newspaper (BuzzMachine):

“It is important for newspapers to boil themselves down to their essence and figure out how to do better at providing that unique and valuable service.”

I don’t consider myself a particularly valuable contributor to the New Newsroom conversation, since I’ve never subscribed to a newspaper, and probably never will (thought I did deliver them for many years). My greatest exposure to the newspaper are when my neighbors go out of town and have them delivered to us while they’re gone. Aside from that, all I typically see is the funnies in the breakroom. That said, here I go anyway.

I generally agree with Jeff on his points about what will keep the newspaper alive, and I do think it’s important that they stay alive because any independant news coverage is important, especially in the current atmosphere. We need all the truth-telling we can get these days, no matter who’s on the receiving end. Mostly I think that Jeff has good pointers that the newspapers would be wise to heed.

However one thread of this particular piece (which it has in common with others he’s written) is the idea of syndicating everything you can:

“I’ll be[t] that half the papers that maintain third-rate bureaus in Washington would do better running news from syndicates….”

I see the same problem with over-syndication that I see with over-consolidation in media markets. Fewer voices means less truth – whatever truth is – and if we end up with all the news in newspapers nationwide provided by 3 or 5 news agencies, the loss of so many voices will be sorely felt, and noticed too late.

Perhaps Jeff’s way is the only way for newspapers to survive, I don’t know, but I’m afraid of a world where every bit of news I read is written by the same 5 or 6 organizations.

A little more about it here. Lots more about it here.

Go. Now.

NPR:

“With TiVos and iPods giving consumers more power, what’s an ad guy to do?”

from Advertising Strategies Challenged in High-Tech Age – All Things Considered

Echoing what Dave (and others, of course) has been saying since I started reading Scripting News – about 2 years now.
Further evidence (if you needed any) that even if you dislike Dave’s politics or public persona, you’d be a fool not to read him and follow what he’s talking about.

Also, I love NPR and listen with some regularity, but sometimes it’s hard to understand how long it takes them to catch up to things like this. Not their strength, perhaps….

SAP:

“Systems, Applications, Products in Data Processing”, formed by four ex-IBM employees who used to work in the ‘Systems/Applications/Projects’ group of IBM.

from this. I’d like to know where he got his info. I understood SAP to stand for something in German. Given that much of the backend ABAP code is commented in German, I suspected that was fairly accurate.

Thanks to Dave, I’m now subscribed to the voting records of my 3 legislators. An avenue in to involved and interactive government, especially when RSS is built in to more apps.

Herb Kohl: RSS

Wonder Tammy: RSS

Super Russ: RSS

Thanks, Dave

Erik, old bean, you’re propogating an untruth:

“Podfather” Adam Curry, the former MTV “VJ” who started the world’s first podcast

From: Vegan.com

The world’s first podcast was probably created by Dave Winer, though Harold Gilchrist might also have some claim there, depending on your definition. But certainly not Adam. Instrumental in it’s growth? Probably. First ever? Definitely not.

I didn’t mean to flood your comments with a bunch of trackbacks. If I could delete them, I would. They were all autogenerated by my links to your post….

After trying out the red button (via Maryam via Scoble) … here’s another red button.

Hey Scott;
Don’t know much about Project 2003 – I stopped being a project manager a little before it came out.  I do know, though, that it’s not part of the standard office offerings.

You might take a look at the Project page, but my personal take is that Project is mostly overkill for what most projects require.