Today documentary filmmakers Robin Chin and John Grimes dropped by Pixar to show their film and to answer questions about their documentary film There’s Something About W, which you can now view in its entirety from their website. In addition, we also screened a showing of Stolen Honor, the film which the Sinclair Broadcast Group initially was going to air, but later pulled when its advertisers began to protest and their stock dipped.

Watch both of them, dig into the facts behind them, and then be sure to vote on November 2.

Contributed by Tom Duff:

Q: What’s the difference between Iraq and Viet Nam?

A: GWB had a plan to get out of Viet Nam.

Damn, I just got the opportunity to watch Jon Stewart’s appearance on Crossfire and boy, did he totally, brutally dominate Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson. Whatever the two hosts thought Stewart was going to do on the show, it was clear who was calling the shots and directing the debate. Stewart was actually very articulate and very serious, and brutally mocked both of these “journalists” for participating in a process which is theater rather than debate. Tucker Carlson in particular seemed very ill at ease, trying to go on the offensive to either mock Stewart or get him into lapsing good naturedly into jokes, but Stewart would have none of this. Stewart patiently explained that he works for Comedy Central. The show that precedes his show has puppets making crank phone calls. His job is to entertain, not to inform. CNN reporters presumably have a greater responsibility.

Ironically, it appears that Stewart understands journalistic integrity far better than either host. I enjoy his show, and no where do I see my own views about our political system more clearly echoed than through his work and the work of all the other fine writers and actors on his show.

To Carlson and Begala: did he make you feel a bit uneasy? He may be a comedian, but he was serious, and he’s not alone in his observations of the farce that is “journalism” in this political season. You guys are hurting America.

Jon, I think you are the smartest guy in America.

You can view this exchange from Media Matters.

It’s great to see a truly great man tear Zell Miller a new one.

I’m sitting in my living room on a Sunday morning, and the urge to yap about something political has just become too strong to ignore. This week has given me another political realization: the realization that I’m really not proud to be a Democrat.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not going to go all Zell Miller on you. The prospect of turning my families future over to the Bush administration frankly sends cold chills down my spine. The prospect of seeing Bush, Cheney and Ashcroft rape the national character and coffers for another four years sends me to the Internet to scan housing prices in Alberta. But again, I’m not proud to be a Democrat.

I don’t believe that the Democrats are the tax-and-spend boogeymen, or that they are pursuing an evil and immoral social agenda to promote homosexuality in the schools. It’s not that they fund the Maplethorpe while taxing poor small businessmen. It’s not that they will hand the keys for the country over to terrorism.

Quite frankly, it’s just their bold incompetence in handing the keys of the country over to Bush.

Honestly, have they given America any reason to vote for Kerry? Certainly Bush has. The economy is pitifully weak. It’s entirely possible that during the administration of both Presidents Bush, not a single net job will have been created for Americans. We’ve alienated many of our key allies, and tried to fight a war in Iraq on the cheap by cutting benefits to military personnel to fatten the wallets of energy producers and defense contractors, nominally to save us from the threat of WMDs which do not exist.

And in the light of all of these revelations: Kerry now trails Bush in most polls.

The DNC have got themselves all knotted up in responding to the Swift Boat Veterens for Truth, perhaps one of the most ironically named groups of all times. The DNC tried to shame Bush into admitting that they were authorized by key Bush campaigners and to denounce their statements, but they forgot: you can’t shame someone without shame. Bush stayed the course, pretending that he wasn’t involved, but not renouncing their tactics either, and the net result: a win for the Republicans, despite the absolute transparency of the the lies.

But more than that, let’s review the wisdom of running someone who has tried to portray himself as a war hero and as a war protestor at the same time with both messages. Particularly a candidate that the opposition will like to portray as someone who “flip flips”. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

Frankly, the Democrats are not just incompetent: they are out of ideas. They simply don’t know how to win. It isn’t the media bias, or the fact that the country’s political ideas have shifted to the right: it’s that they simply don’t have any message. The Republicans do: they want you to be scared. They want you to fear terrorism, to fear socialized medicine, to fear change. Don’t change captains in the middle of the voyage. Don’t rock the boat. Take off your shoes so that we can check you for bombs. Don’t worry about those people in Abu Ghraib or at Guantanamo. If they weren’t bad, they wouldn’t be there.

In the face of this crap, the DNC is out of ideas. It is simply tragic.

While driving in this morning, the airwaves were abuzz with the news that the California Supreme Court had ruled to annul 4000 same sex marriages that were performed in San Francisco. The court chose not to rule on the constitutionality of the law which defines marriage as a union between man and women, but instead chose to rule on the much narrower issue of whether the mayor had the right to grant marriage licenses in violation of that law. It was found that he did not, and the court then ruled that all marriages so performed were void.

There are of course lawsuits pending that will ask the court to address the broader issue as to whether the equal protection provisions of the California state constitution nullifies bans on same-sex marriages as discriminatory. It will be interesting to see how the California Supreme Court deals with the issues raised here but tabled without comment.

To the 4000 couples whose marriages were declared null and void, keep your chins up, and your formal wear pressed. I suspect that ultimately you’ll be needing them again.

In the discussion on metafilter regarding the Brown Equals Terrorist, someone posted a nice link to a summary of the rights of photographers.

It’s not clear that this document is up to date with respect to the recent Supreme Court decision in Hiibel v. Nevada.

In trying to determine what the actual rule of law is here in California, I found this newspaper article, which definitely sends a mixed message. My reading of the Hiibel case is that police are not allowed to stop or detain you for purely arbitrary reasons, but Hiibel does grant them wide latitude in asking for identification if they suspect a crime has been committed.

It seems to me that given the findings in Hiibel v. Nevada, refusal to identify could be prosecuted under California Penal Code 148, the relevent section presented below.

148. (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

Ironically, this section largely deals with penalties which seem arise from intentional jamming of police radio frequencies and offenses related to someone grabbing a firearm from a police officer. The penalties involved are up to $1000 in fines and a year in prison. It would seem to me that applying this law to simple refusals to identify is a broad expansion of its original intent. Indeed, the Herald article above seems to indicate that the district attorney refuses to prosecute such cases where the suspects are not held on other charges: a sane and sober interpretation that helps to protect the people against overly zealous police officers.