Life Imitates HBO

A couple of Saturdays ago, Walkout. a film about a series of protests led by Los Angeles high school students to protest the inferior education they were receiving, premiered on HBO. Starring Spy Kids' Alexa Vega, the film provoked an ambivalent reaction in me. The actors portrayed a nascent student movement as if they were a bunch of naive, well-scrubbed Disney kids playing at activism. Some of the dialogue was hopelessly corny and predictable. Ed Olmos was the director, and the film sort of reflected his plodding, sober idealism--unrefutable, but drab and somewhat lifeless. But he was rescued in the end by the decision to faithfully reproduce the outlandish violence that the L.A. police visited on the protesting high schoolers. It's one of those moments you never see on television, the kind that makes you at least think about fighting back.
So less than a week later, massive protests occur in L.A., Phoenix, Denver, Chicago, Milwaukee over the insane Sensenbrenner anti-immigrant legislation. The throngs in downtown Los Angeles were estimated to be over a million, including...high school students who walked out of class! Could it be that they all stayed home the week before watching HBO, and that resulted in taking it to the streets?
Sure looks familiar, except, or course for the presence of all those American flags. Reminds me a little of the old labor movement, I guess. I did see one banner on television that said "WE'RE PART OF THE SOLUTION," which I found interesting. So here is the first mass movement of the decade, and it's led by a Latino constituency. Wouldn't it be great if there could be a march like this demanding the end of Puerto Rico's second-class citizenship (either through independence or enhanced commonwealth, of course, unless Residente Calle 13 is ready to take the reins as governor of the radical state of Puerto Rico)?

Lying Liar and the Lie He Got Caught In

At last week's remarkable press conference, during which he seemed as if he was going to lose his lunch, President Bush got all hot and bothered when Helen Thomas, who did such a great job harassing Reagan during Iran Contra, asked him what led to the decision to invade Iraq.

HELEN THOMAS: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President -- your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, your Cabinet officers, former Cabinet officers, intelligence people and so forth -- but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it?
BUSH: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- that I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect.
HELEN THOMAS: And...
BUSH: Hold on for a second, please. Excuse me. Excuse me. No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true.

There's a great discussion of this moment (here), including a link to the video, as well as a list of various Bush backers who beat up on Thomas (all men, using at times amazingly offensive disparaging remarks about her age and looks) for asking the most incisive question of the press conference.

But today, guess what, there's seeming proof that Dubya was completely full of tu sabes que when he made these remarks.

Apparently, a memo has surfaced that alleges that in a meeting with British prime minister Tony Blair, Bush had already decided to force the war and was cavalierly mulling over options on how he was going to foist it on to the world. Check out these excerpts:

The memo shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq.
At their meeting, Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair candidly expressed their doubts that chemical, biological or nuclear weapons would be found in Iraq in the coming weeks, the memo said. The president spoke as if an invasion was unavoidable. The two leaders discussed a timetable for the war, details of the military campaign and plans for the aftermath of the war.

Without much elaboration, the memo also says the president raised three possible ways of provoking a confrontation. Since they were first reported last month, neither the White House nor the British government has discussed them.
"The U.S. was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in U.N. colours," the memo says, attributing the idea to Mr. Bush. "If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach."
It also described the president as saying, "The U.S. might be able to bring out a defector who could give a public presentation about Saddam's W.M.D," referring to weapons of mass destruction.
A brief clause in the memo refers to a third possibility, mentioned by Mr. Bush, a proposal to assassinate Saddam Hussein. The memo does not indicate how Mr. Blair responded to the idea.

Here's the starkest evocation of how cluelessly arrogant and idiotic the two were:

While the president's sentiments about invading Iraq were known at the time, the previously unreported material offers an unfiltered view of two leaders on the brink of war, yet supremely confident.
The memo indicates the two leaders envisioned a quick victory and a transition to a new Iraqi government that would be complicated, but manageable. Mr. Bush predicted that it was "unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups." Mr. Blair agreed with that assessment.

So Bill O'Reilly, uh, Tucker Carlson, hey! Give it up to Helen Thomas, who will always be your superior.