BAGnewsNotes

How The New Yorker Snubbed Mardi Gras

I was both moved and embarrassed by William Joyce's piece on the NOLA weblog.

Titled "How Dick Cheney Stole The Thunder From One Louisiana Artist," it explains how Joyce's Mardi Gras illustration slated for last week's New Yorker cover was pulled at the last minute in favor of the Bush/Cheney Brokeback Mountain offering.  (Yes, it's the one I'm now sheepish to say I posted just down the page.)  Given the relative absence of New Orleans from the national spotlight, some stirrings of renewal, and the essential and bittersweet celebration of Mardi Gras, this seemed like an important image to offer now.

Since I (all too innocently) promoted the Bush/Cheney cover, I'm all too happy to highlight the artwork it superseded, as well as direct you to  the full size version, and to Joyce's explanation of events.  (I think it's the second piece down).  I'd also be interested in your thoughts on the image itself, the New Orleans saga, and, especially, the editorial politics on display.  (I really do love this illustration, by the way.  Doesn't the Katrina dress conjure the tornado scene in The Wizard Of Oz?  And what about that lightening bolt!)

I guess the political cover was both sexier and more salable.  But perhaps it also allowed The New Yorker to duck a confrontation with what will surely be regarded as one of America's profound humanitarian failures.  (It could also be for this shame that the green man steps on the face of tragedy.)

(illustration: William Joyce.  February 2006.  Shreveport, La. nola.com.)

The Belarusian Widows (Or, The BAG Takes Some Visual Liberty During A Pause In The News Cycle)

As far as I can tell, there aren't many images of Bush actually talking (as opposed to simply posing head-on) with wounded soldiers, or others who have experienced severe trauma from political cataclysm.  (What we do know, however, is that Laura Bush consistently explains how victims end up consoling the Bushs.)

Maybe "W" has his mind on his upcoming trip to India and Pakistan.  Perhaps the eye contact is a harder to come by because the two women are aggrieved (and/or attractive) and Bush has to carry the conversation.

From a political standpoint, however, the image would be completely trivial if not  for the body language of Assistant Secretary of State Steven Hadley.  Although you need to see it in its original version, this seems like a nice example of the handler-of-the-moment -- regardless how minor the situation -- being reflexively on guard to insure Bush (at least half-way) delivers the content.

(image: Paul Morse/White House. February 27, 2006.  Washington.  whitehouse.gov)

Your Turn: Iraq Over TIME

Condi Update: "Honey, I Lost The Mid-East!"

(clickable)

What are the chances anyone will look back at the Condi years at the State Department and refer to "The Rice Doctrine?"

Blowing Smoke

So, the hostility is simply an overcompensation for homophobia?

Regarding the hats, I can definitely see Cheney coming out of this (at least, with the mainstream) looking much more sympathetic.  Now he's a bad ass with a soft center.

Having been thoroughly conditioned to government-by-aggression, I see nothing ironic about the way these guys are dressed.

Smoking gun?  Dream on!

Sort of weird seeing the manic Bush looking reflective -- let alone, dwelling.  On the other hand, it's almost impossible to believe Cheney actually moves.

Is the denim distressed, or are those real Levis?

Less water next year!

I guess the Olympics really are invisible.

Five plus years is a long time to be blowing on that thing.

(illustration: Mark Ulriksen/New Yorker.  "Watch Your Back Mountain."  February 27, 2006. Cover.)

Zal Watch: All Hail Breaking Loose

Well, there's one thing the Sunnis and Shiites agreed on today. 

Both Abdul-Salam al-Kubaisi, a spokesman for the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars, and Shiite leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim said U.S. Ambassador Khalilzad bore some responsibility for the mosque bombing in Samarra on Wednesday. 

When you look at factors that elevated the tension this week, you can start with Don Zal's Monday press conference.  Khalilizad issued a warning to the Iraqis that the U.S. would not continue to support institutions run by groups with sectarian aims.  I believe he was primarily referring to groups with connections to armed militias.  Still, the distinction seems to have been lost.  On Tuesday, the Prime Minister blasted back.  According to the NYT:

Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the prime minister and a conservative Shiite, scoffed at Mr. Khalilzad's remarks. "When we are asked, 'Do you want the government to be sectarian?' our answer is 'no,' " Mr. Jaafari said. "Not because the U.S. ambassador says this and warns us, but because this is our policy."  He added, "We think that sovereignty means no one interferes in our affairs."

I've been holding onto this image ever since it appeared two weeks ago.  The thought that keeps going through my mind is: how odd that Iraqi soldiers would be saluting the American ambassador.

(image: Wathiq Khuzaie/Reuters. February 2, 2006.  Baghdad.  Via YahooNews.)

Blowing The Roof Off?

Juan Cole worries that Iraqi's --
in considering how the fate
of the Askariya Shrine in Samarra
might cause the country  to unravel --
will come to sequence it like this....

Port This

How Karl Rove Took The Drama Out Of The First Bush-Abramoff Photo. (And How He Didn't.)

(click image for full version)

The much anticipated first photo of George Bush and Jack Abramoff together has come and gone.  The question is, who noticed?  If you didn't, don't feel bad.  It was designed that way.

According to the NYT summary, the shot was taken at a meeting in May 2001 in a conference room in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.  White House records indicate the event involved a gathering of state legislators who had supported the president's 2001 tax cut.

To the WH's professed surprise, however, the image shows Bush greeting Raul Garza, the Chief of the Southwest Texas Kickapoo tribe.  (At the time, Abramoff was trying to land him as a client.)  Among others, the meeting also included Rove, Abramoff and his friend Grover Norquist, the conservative power player and president of Americans for Tax Reform.

What Karl Accomplished:

By releasing a shot with a "tiny Abramoff," the scale reinforces Bush's claim that the connection was insignificant.  The fact Little Jack does appear with Bush for the first time, however, both pacifies the press and minimizes the impact of further announcements.  It's also interesting the first Bush- Abramoff photo also depersonalizes Bush by showing him from the back.

The Most Obscene Pictures Taken At Abu Ghraib

(...thumbnails clickable)

A.     B.     C.

I decided I would try and determine which photo from Abu Ghraib I considered the most blasphemous.

After going through all the torture pictures again, however, I couldn't find anything more obscene than the images of Don Rumsfeld on the premises.  Rumsfeld actually visited the prison a couple times.  The most well documented was the visit he made in May '04 after the first set of torture pictures had been released.  At that point, the visit represented one of those classic BushCo. reactions in which any misstep requires a show of bravado at the scene of the crime.

On that trip, most of the images were recorded on the way to the installation or on the grounds outside.  (Example 1, 2, 3.) As far as I can tell, there was only one shot taken inside, which the Village Voice had a field day with.  (The caption reads:  "This is the only known photo of soldiers at Abu Ghraib taking pictures of a fully clothed person inside the prison.")