Bold Pirates, Typical Bureaucrats

From the Times of London, on the pirates that hijacked a ship laden with oil:

Roger Middleton, a Horn of Africa specialist at the Chatham House think-tank, said that the capture was a crucial escalation. “Now that they have shown they are able to seize an enormous ship like this, it is beyond a military solution. You won’t fix this without a political solution.”

Surprise, surprise. Someone's quickly figured out how to make a buck out of this and form another bureaucracy. And lemme guess: the UN to the rescue?

Such an announcement can only encourage pirates to hijack every ship in sight. Once you make it a political issue, then the pirates are political people, ergo they have "rights."

Being hard people, pirates know cowardice and opportunity when they see it. They'll call a politician's bluff in no time at all, and pretty soon the seven seas will be one big Palestine requiring a Sea Chart to Peace.

Hell with 'em. Break out the yardarms and the planks. It's time to get real.

Logic in the Narrative of Tolerance

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Despite the Nov. 4 vote, the decision to ban same-sex marriage is not in the best interests of our society and the future of our state. A highly charged court challenge is headed for a clarifying ruling by the state Supreme Court.

The voters' decision on Prop. 8 was a huge disappointment, as it would allow the will of the majority to discriminate against a minority. By a 52 to 48 percent margin, voters chose intolerance over equal protection under the law and inclusion.

Got it. When the minority get what they wish, it's called equal protection and tolerance. When the majority get what they wish, it's discrimination.

Oh, please, great and might Supreme Court, let us kneel before ye omnipotent oracles and receive clarity for our ignorant and evil ways...

Der Untergang - Review

Director: Oliver Hirschbiegel
Writer: Bernd Eichinger
Starring: Bruno Ganz
Runtime: 2 hours, 28 minutes

It took me a while to get around to this movie. I've been studying Nazi Germany and World War II since high school because I find it one of the most fascinating periods in world history. Trouble is, you can only take so much of it. A few books here, a couple of films there, and then a lot of time off to decompress.

If you immerse yourself in Hitler's Willing Executioners one week, Stalingrad the next, and a Hitler biography the week after, you're asking for depression. Over the years I've read dozens of books, articles, and diaries on the subject, but I always pace myself. Never too much at one time.

I think I wrote about this a while back, but when I was in university I dated a Jewish girl and nothing churned my stomach as much as reading the vile, bizarre history of Nazi Germany, then going over to her place and looking into her beautiful brown eyes. You have to shelve madness away when you see beautiful things lest the madness makes you morose.

Why did I just write all of that?

Good question. I think it's because every time I buy a book with a swastika on it, I'm afraid that the bookshop girl will think I'm some neo-Nazi loon, so I wrote the above stuff to let you know I'm not. Funny.

I remember once I was carrying a copy of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (still the best book on the subject) and an Israeli friend was walking by. He said, "Can I see that?" I had forgotten to turn the cover towards my hip, to hide the swastika. So I gave him the book and he looked it over, and he looked at me, and I could tell there were all sorts of questions running through his mind. In the end, he decided not to ask them, and just said it was good to see that I liked history.

Swastikas do that. They're packed with potent meaning, and they make people take notice. It was Hitler and the Nazi Party that gave those bent lines such incredible force, a force that lasts to this day. That's why I've never held any truck with the people that say Bush is like Hitler, or any other politician is like Hitler. No one but Hitler has given a symbol such stopping power. Some anti-religion types might disagree and say Christ and the cross have such potency, but I don't think too many of them walk past a church, see a cross, and call the police. Only the swastika does that.

In the past hundred years, nobody has been like Hitler except Stalin, but no one compares anybody to Stalin because Stalin always gets a pass, mainly for being a communist. You can hand me Pol Pot, Milosovic and other dictators, but on the whole these were entirely regional figures and did not shape world events as Hitler and Stalin did.

While the swastika stops people in their tracks, the letters CCCP on a t-shirt hardly make people blink, and the hammer and sickle seem somewhat quaint though more people in the 20th century were killed under that symbol than any other, including the swastika. In any event, it's interesting that Stalin and Lenin photographs are tourist items in St. Petersburg while you will never find a Hitler portrait for sale in a Munich tourist trap.

What does this have to do with the film Der Untergang? I think it's the feeling that the film gives you. It makes you do a lot of thinking, some of it not so good.

The movie details the last week of Hitler's life. He spent these days in the bottom of his Berlin bunker, surrounded by the usual sycophants, until one by one they all left him (with the exception of Joseph and Magda Goebbels; after Hitler committed suicide, the Goebbels also took their own lives, but not before executing their six children).

The movie is historically accurate, but it may have one drawback: it expects you to know your stuff. Goebbels' name is hardly spoken in the film, but the actor Ullrich Mathes looks so much like him that the director expects you to clue in and stay with it. The same goes for fatso Hermann Goering, slick Albert Speer, and SS leader Heinrich Himmler. Even the bit part thugs are very well cast as far as appearance goes.

The film is subtitled, so if you're not into that, you may not like it. I think the film is the better for it. My German is rusty as hell so I needed the subtitles, but there is something about the guttural cadence of German that brings the words you're reading to life. Bruno Ganz plays Hitler, and he is superb in the role. The German language only adds to the effect and makes him more believeable than Anthony Hopkins was in 1980's The Bunker (Hopkins was fine in that movie, but he was still an Englishman; it makes a difference).

I would be curious to hear from someone that has never heard of the last days of Hitler, and what they thought of the film. I wouldn't be surprised if they found it somewhat tedious. During the last week of his life, Hitler degenerated into mad delusions of victory one minute, and deep despair the next.

Last known photo, outside the bunker
Every few hours Hitler would be moving large armies around a map, until one of his braver generals told him that that army no longer existed. Hitler would blame this on a general's betrayal and on cowards in the military. The next day he would be talking about the 1000 jet fighters he had in reserve to crush his opponents. Then back into depression as he learned the Russians were only kilometers away, then euphoria as he declared that the 9th Army would come to the rescue, until being told that the 9th Army could no longer fight, then back into depression, and so on. For a movie, this can get old in a hurry. Since you're stuck in a bunker with the guy, the mood swings can lose their power. You could end up halfway through the film saying, "Ah, here he goes again," and tune out.

But the filmakers stuck with it, and I admire them for that. They played it more or less the way it's agreed upon in the history books and, knowing that, it makes for a more fascinating film. After all, there were a lot of people in the bunker with Hitler. If we as an audience find his tedious ravings insane, how could the people in the bunker not do the same?

That's the million dollar question, the one that gets argued about all the time. How could this man command such obedience? You can argue that one until the cows come home and you still won't be any closer to an answer. And that's another reason the film makes you think some dark thoughts, both about the past and the future.

I read some reviews about this film a while back. They were mainly good, but several were disturbed that the film showed some sympathy to the people in the bunker. I don't agree, or in any case don't think it's worth worrying about. It all depends on how you look at sympathy versus empathy. Empathy is no big deal. Can I feel empathy for people stuck in a hole, waiting to be captured by a vengeful, evil Russian regime, while watching their surroundings turn into a death cult of suicide and execution? Yes I can. I can understand their terror and hopelessness. I am empathetic to those feelings. Do I have any sympathy for them? None whatsoever.

The writer and director of this movie are empathetic to their characters, but they are not sympathetic to them. To direct the movie otherwise would have been phony. Much as we would like to believe that monsters do not cry, sometimes they show us tears. Filming those tears does not demand that the audience should reach out and hug the monsters. (Magda Goebbels is an entirely different story in the tears department; it was she that fed sleeping potions to her six children, then came back later and crushed poison capsules between their jaws; her reasoning was simple: living without National Socialism would have been too much for her children to bear. So she killed them. And people wonder why I distrust political hero-worship).

One other note: I saw a preview for the new Tom Cruise film Valkyrie. It's about the attempted assassination of Adolph Hitler in 1944. From about 1939 on there were several plotters in the army that entertained doing Hitler in, but the plans never came to fruition for all kinds of reasons, mostly to do with spinelessness. In 1943 one attempt was made to blow up Hitler's plane (the bomb didn't go off), and another attempt to kill him a few days later also flunked. Then in 1944, a bomb exploded that injured Hitler but didn't kill him. This is the bombing that Valkyrie is about. During the preview of the movie I heard these words spoken by a character: "We have to show the world that we are all not like him."

This is extremely dubious. If the film is being built around that, you should be wary of the film's central theme. An assassination of Hitler could have been made many times before 1944, but most army officers involved in any "resistance" were chicken to try it. And why bother? In the early days of the war, Germany had conquered France and taken a big bite out of Russia. Then things changed. It wasn't until the war turned in the Allies' favor that the plotters went into gear. They were especially eager to kill Hitler in 1944 when all seemed lost, because they wanted to make peace with a Western army, as opposed to the Russians, from whom they would receive no mercy. Any moral "not like him" stuff in the film should be looked upon with deep skepticism.

Tolerance

I'm getting a bit tired of hearing that "both sides" need to cool it over the Prop 8 deal in California, especially when I keep seeing stories like this:

Employees of the Los Angeles restaurant that came under fire this week after a manager gave $100 to the campaign to ban same-sex marriage in California said they had made a $500 contribution to the advocacy group that is raising money to challenge Proposition 8...

Manager Larry Crenshaw gave $50 to "try to smooth things over" and counter the boycott. He said the protests had started to affect employees.

One server called in Thursday worried about going into work. Thursday night crowds grew to about 200 people, and customers leaving the restaurant were called vulgarities, Crenshaw said.

Money for peace and quiet? That could be called extortion. If I was, you know, cynical.

The California people voted to have marriage be defined as a union between a man and a woman. Unfortunately, that doesn't fit the modern political narrative. It just wasn't supposed to be this way. Now there's protests, threats to people and property, and a call for everybody to keep calm.

Huh. As far as I can tell, it's only the Anti-8 side trying to put businesses under and threatening people with violence.

The Anti-8's have their target now: religious people, and Mormons in particular. You can't just protest at every house in California, so you have to pick your spots wisely. Like, say, Utah.

Anti-8 groups and gay rights activists conveniently see the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as the financial muscle behind the Pro-8 vote. Thousands of protesters have shown up in Salt Lake City, Utah, and packages containing "white powder" were delivered to the Church's head office. The FBI is investigating.

There is also a name-and-shame campaign in the works, to identify Mormon business owners and, presumably, target their businesses for protests and boycotts. The Independent says, "Dozens of Hollywood stars are backing the movement."

The other day I watched a video where a few gay rights guys stomped a woman's styrofoam cross and wouldn't let her speak to the press. So much for tolerating free speech. This was followed by the two bubble-headed news anchors saying, "There's a lot of hate on both sides." If by "a lot" you mean one old woman and hundreds of Anti-8 loud mouths, you're on the money.

Question: do any of these people have jobs? A lot of these protests take place during the week and well into the night. What do they tell their boss? "Boss, I need a few days off. I have to go yell at Mormons in Salt Lake City." Maybe that's why the unemployment rate's going up. Everyone's out of state shouting at someone until they quit their job or close up shop.

Further protests of Mormon churches are now taking place in Chicago and New York. None of the church-goers there cast a ballot in California, but what does it matter? They're all the same. Right?

I laugh at the way the Anti-8 news is spread in the press. If thousands of protesters from Utah descended on Castro Street in San Francisco, or outed gay business owners and asked the nation to boycott them, it would be regarded as a shocking hate crime.

What do we get from the mainstream press instead? Not much. A little tongue clucking, some advice that both sides need to remain calm, and the AP calling the white powder deliveries an "attack" with quotation marks, as if scaring the hell out of an office secretary isn't the real deal.

What about the will of the voters? Ahh, who cares? Governor Schwarzenegger: "For me, marriage is between a man and a woman. But I don't want to ever force my will on anyone," Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said on ABC television's This Week with George Stephanopoulos.

"I think that the Supreme Court was right and that everyone should have the right.

"So the Supreme Court, you know, I think ought to go and look at that again. And we'll go back to the same decision. I think that they will. And I think that the important thing now is to resolve this issue in that way."

Ooookay. So the governor doesn't think gay marriage is right, knows his state's people agree with him, but still thinks the Supreme Court should tell them all what to do. He doesn't want to force his will on anyone, he just wants the court to force their will on the state. Some "leader." (I've been putting the word "leader" in quotation marks a lot lately. I haven't seen enough evidence of leadership in the past year to give me respect for almost any elected official on the planet).

In the same vein, the NAACP recently asked the state Supreme Court to halt the ban on gay marriage, though 80% of African Americans voted yes to Prop 8. Once again, nothing like listening to the desires of your constituents.

Me, I'm not one way or the other on the whole gay marriage thing, but this is just one more episode in 2008 that cracks me up. This election cycle has exposed so many people for the hypocrites that they are. It's hilarious watching them work, and even funnier watching people bend over backwards not to offend the offenders.

Tolerance. Ain't it a bitch?

Quantum of Condescension

I was watching a CBC interview featuring Daniel Craig last night and I was amazed at his self control. Carole MacNeil peppered him with asinine questions, and Craig managed to hold it together.

I don't know what it's going to take for interviewers to get it through their heads that the man is a successful actor playing the role of James Bond. Casino Royale was well received by fans and critics, and Quantum of Solace is a hit.

So why do interviewers constantly ask the man, "How did you feel when everyone hated you? Did it bother you that no one said you could play James Bond? Did you read the blogs and get upset? What does that do to you as a person?"

I don't know about Craig, but it would make me want to slug an interviewer.

In last night's interview, Craig played along, but you could see his rage beginning to boil. MacNeil spent 5 minutes on the "How did you feel being called a loser?" stuff, even mentioning the name of a particular website which exists solely to bash Daniel Craig. Then she asked, "Do you think you're sexy?"

Sharp. Insightful. Very informative.

For the last time: the man's an actor playing a part. His movies are successful, and his returns on Bond are through the roof. End of story. Let go of the phony controversy.

The biggest laugh of the interview came when MacNeil pressed him again on how it feels to be hated, and Craig said he's become intensely private and doesn't like to do interviews.

I can't imagine why.

Want an even bigger laugh? Here's MacNeil's bio on the CBC website:

Carole MacNeil is now one of public broadcasting's most senior journalists. She's noted for her intelligence and her ability to really listen to the people she interviews.

Body of Lies - Review

Director: Ridley Scott
Writer: William Monahan/ David Ignatius (novel)
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio/Russell Crowe
Runtime: 2 hours, 8 minutes

Body of Lies is a fairly good action-drama. Like all of Ridley Scott's movies, there's one thing you can say about it: it isn't boring. It moves at a good pace from scene to scene, location to location, line of dialogue to gunshot.

Leonardo DiCaprio plays Roger Ferris, a CIA operative working in the Middle East. It's his job to expose the leaders of terrorist cells and send the info back to States, where his boss Ed Hoffman (Russell Crowe) can decide how to take them out.

Ridley Scott delights in showing how small the world is in the modern age. "Sending info" doesn't take as long as it used to. Though Ferris is sometimes in the streets of Jordan or the deserts of Syria, he is never without a friend. Up in the heavens sits a Predator drone, beaming his image back to the United States. At one point in the film, Ferris looks up to the sky, sees the Predator twinkling in the sun, and tells his CIA handlers to take a hike in case they blow his cover.

Ferris' target is the elusive Al-Saleem, a high level terrorist mastermind. Al-Saleem is responsible for a number of bombings in Europe, and vague intelligence suggests that he is planning dozens of attacks across the continent.

Finding him is tough. In one scene, Ed Hoffman tells the CIA brass how easy it is to avoid CIA detection as long as the person you're looking for decides to live in the past. It's a nice juxtaposition. While Hoffman has a cell phone permanently clipped to his ear and computer technology at his fingertips, it is virtually worthless as long as his quarry never uses the phone or sends an email. If a disciplined terrorist can pretend that cell phones and computers don't exist, how do you find them?

The old fashioned way. This is where Ferris comes in, using ruse after ruse, and lie after life, to bring Al-Saleem into the light. Ferris speaks Arabic, knows the Middle East like the back of his hand, and thinks he has the key to unlocking the secretive doors of the Arabic world: patience and cooperation. Early on in the film he befriends the head of Jordanian intelligence, Hani (played by a very good Mark Strong), a gentleman of impeccable dress and manners...unless you lie to him.

On the whole, the movie works, except for this: the love story. I don't mind love stories, but they have to feel real and this one doesn't. In a way, the love story could have been an movie unto itself. If it was left out of this picture it wouldn't have been missed.

Ferris' love interest is played by Golshifteh Farahani. She is strikingly beautiful and her chemistry with DiCaprio is good. It would have been interesting to see more scenes of them together in another picture, but since there weren't any in this one it was very hard to believe that DiCaprio fell for her. Their scenes just hang in mid-air, stapled to the movie as a plot device.

I wanted to like Farahani's part of the story except for one nagging detail: a woman in a suspense thriller is usually there as kidnap-bait. Though this cliche doesn't occur in the movie, it comes very close, and it's irritating. You will also find yourself wondering how a man like Ferris can sacrifice a number of innocent people, yet care so much about a woman he just met. Worse than that, Hoffman seems to care how his number one CIA talent feels about her, though he's spent the whole movie telling DiCaprio to sacrifice innocent lives and, in fact, says "there are no innocent people." Ask yourself if a man like Hoffman would ever entertain the idea of risking his agent over what Hoffman calls "poontang."

As in most films that don't satisfy, this story lets its characters go completely against type in the final third of the film and you end up feeling cheated by the writer's sleight-of-hand. In trouble and need an ending? No problem. Just make the characters do things they would never do. There's your ending. If the audience lets it go, then you've got a winner.

See the movie. It's good, but don't expect a masterpiece.

Photos: Yahoo Movies

Simply Sublime

Here's a picture of the two clowns that rang the opening bell on Wall Street at the end of the week. I often use the word "clowns" for economic and political bigshots, but I never meant it literally.

This must have been someone's idea of good satire. Right?

From the NY Post: After ringing the bell, Harvey and Grandma wandered the floor trying to spread joy and merriment, placing funny red noses on exchange officials to touch the funny bones of even the most shaken traders.

Say what? They're lucky the next day's headline wasn't Two Clowns Hanged By Mob On Stock Market Floor.

The Dow ended the day down another 337 points. Ha ha. Can I get a balloon animal with my bankruptcy?



Photo: NY Post

Just Wondering When The World Ends

A few thoughts about the supposed financial crisis:

Is the "global financial crisis" really a crisis, or is it the latest excuse to cover bigshot asses, both in Washington and in the downtrodden corporations? I'm reminded of the dimwit British political aide that wrote a memo saying, "It is now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury. Councillors expenses?" The date was September 11, 2001.

I keep hearing about how bad things are, yet the roads are full of cars, people continue to work, shoppers continue to shop. There's all kind of money floating around. That seems strange considering many industries say they need a bailout and beg for cash at the government trough. Just remember: it is not the government's money. The government has no money. The money is your money. You gave it to them to pay for roads, garbage disposal, an army, a police force, museums, parks, water, and electricity. Doubtful you thought big wads of your cash would be up for grabs at an insurance company or General Motors.

I know it makes sense for governments to use fear as a weapon to force people listen to them, but let's be real: the vast majority of Canadian and US citizens are doing very well. Tonight I dropped into a movie and saw the new Bond flick was sold out in all 3 theatres, for all 14 showings. This included the new VIP theatre, which costs an extra seven bucks for a seat.

The people in line weren't dressed like bums. The kids shooting pool looked well fed, and the families bowling (yes, movie theatres have bowling alleys now) were having a good time.

So where's all the misery that comes with the end of the world?

Our "leaders" are shamelessly using fear to ram their political agendas down our throats. If the economy does continue to slide, it will be in no small part because our "leaders" told us it would. People will hang onto their cash and worry about their jobs because not one of these boobs is saying, "Things are good. Not great in some sectors, but good for the majority. Relax."

Instead, it's this:

“We want to change the rules of the game in the financial world,” French President Nicolas Sarkozy vowed before the Group of 20 industrialized and emerging economies began its two-day summit with dinner at the White House.

“There is a need for urgency,” added British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who is calling for a “college of supervisors” to oversee the world's 30 largest banks.

Hundreds of years of proven free market success, and these clowns think a) it needs fixing, and b) they can fix it.

Fat chance.

As I wrote a couple of months ago (back when we were supposed to be really scared that the economy was about to go over a cliff, as opposed to now, when we should still be really scared because the economy is still about to go over a cliff) I didn't like the sounds of the first $700 billion bailout in the US. It set a dangerous precedent and was bound to invite other countries to try the same thing.

Now they're doing it with gusto. The "leaders" of the world's top economies met in Washington yesterday for yet another emergency meeting on how to toy with a system that doesn't need any fixing. They are determined to wrap bureaucratic tentacles around the financial system and destroy it completely.

But who's the bigger fool? Them, or us? Note that not one of these world "leaders" is a new guy. They're the same people that were governing when the economy took a dive. Gordon Brown's calling for supervision? Gimme a break, Gordie. He was supervising things when it all went to hell. Now we're supposed to believe that he can help fix it?

I said this before, and I still believe it: the system did not fail. The system worked perfectly. People tried to game it for political and financial reasons, and the system chopped their hands off. That's the way systems should work. When you cheat them, they make you pay. Today's crying about a failed system is a smoke screen. The only thing that failed were the cons and tricks that the players used to try and make a buck. They goofed.

Left to itself, there is no doubt that the market would rebound. Yes, some jobs would be lost, and some money would go up in smoke, but probably no more than the taxpayer money that is being poured into the stratosphere every day trying to stave off the inevitable.

Granted I am no economist, but even I understand what happens in a marketplace. Borrowed too much? Expanded too quickly? Built lousy cars? Let unions drive your payscale through the roof? Went billions into debt? Paid your CEO hundreds of millions? Guess what? The market is going to screw you.

My common sense economics degree also tells me this: when governments are constantly holding emergency meetings and playing a now-you-see-it-now-you-don't game with bailout money, the market will continue to slide. How could it not? For the past week, the US government has been swinging back and forth about whether or not to grant money to the auto makers. They still haven't decided and will meet again on Monday. Would you buy Ford stock in that environment, or would you only be able to withstand five days of hemming and hawing before dumping it? And just as a quick aside, I'm wondering when it became forbidden for companies that suck to go bankrupt?

The big bad government wolf is huffing and puffing. If they eventually blow the whole house down, it's only because we let them.

More On The New American Blacklist

Watch CBS Videos Online

If These Girls Aren't Worth Fighting For, Nothing Is

From the AP:

No students showed up at Mirwais Mena girls' school in the Taliban's spiritual birthplace the morning after it happened.

A day earlier, men on motorcycles attacked 15 girls and teachers with acid.

The men squirted the acid from water bottles onto three groups of students and teachers walking to school Wednesday, principal Mehmood Qaderi said. Some of the girls have burns only on their school uniforms but others will have scars on their faces.

One teenager still cannot open her eyes after being hit in the face with acid.

"Today the school is open, but there are no girls," Qaderi said Thursday. "Yesterday, all of the classes were full." His school has 1,500 students.

I hope our good Canadian troops find these acid-throwing, women-maiming scumbags and go to work with a sledgehammer. No quarter.

The Have-Not Province Has All The Answers

Where to begin?

In one article, the Toronto Star accidentally shows the hypocricy, greed, and ineptitude of the Ontario government.

The highlights, emphasis mine:

Ontario is at a "crossroads" over growing youth violence fuelled by poverty, racism, poor housing and troubles in the school system, says a long-awaited new report.

It makes 30 recommendations to Premier Dalton McGuinty, key among them $200 million in improved mental health care for youth to keep them on the right track.

"In a province with a health budget of $40 billion and a youth incarceration budget of $163 million, we believe that the $200 million estimate of the cost of providing universal mental health services is manageable," said the authors, former cabinet ministers Alvin Curling and Roy McMurtry.

But I thought Ontario was broke? Gotta love that free health care. And whatever happened to the word "parents" when discussing children? Sorry. Forgot. The state's their nanny.

To combat racism, the authors called for the province to take "immediate steps" to make sure teachers and administrators at schools "better reflect the neighbourhoods they serve."

In other words, hire based on race.

It comes as McGuinty's government struggling with a shrinking economy because of the global financial crisis, which is draining tax revenues to the point that Ontario will run a $500 million deficit this year.

Yup, that dastardly - cue creepy music - Global Financial Crisis. The perfect excuse for a government that wants to spend more cash by taking more of your money, then whining that they didn't take enough of it.

Their Jealousy Will Get Her Everywhere

During the Republican Governors Association convention today, Palin said this:

"We're hearing now more talk of additional taxpayer bailouts ... for companies, for corporations, perhaps even states now who may be standing in line with their hands out despite, perhaps, some poor management decisions on their part that helped tank our economy," she said.

Palin stressed the need for what she called greater economic "accountability and personal responsibility" while urging "conservative solutions to these economic challenges."

Good move. She knows she has to make hay out of the spotlight she's received over the past two months and not let herself be forgotten up in Alaska. She must strike while the iron is hot and become a force without McCain.

As for the other governors at the convention, it was a case of holding the lady's hat and crying about it. Anonymously.

CNN:

Some Republican governors told CNN they were not particularly happy with the way the RGA press conference was executed Thursday, saying they agreed to go as a show of GOP governors' unity, but they ended up feeling like silent Palin supporters, because it was clearly a press conference called for her.

The GOP governors spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity.

One called it awkward: "I'm sure you could see it on some of our faces."

One anonymous governor called the conference "weird," and lamented that it made Palin look like the de facto leader of the Republican party.

News for you, dude: when a lady says "the past is the past," starts talking about a party message regarding the bailout, and draws a press scrum to hear her every word, she is the leader of the party. Not de facto, but in fact. Besides, how can one of these no-name guys be a leader when they're afraid to even say things on the record? An anonymous governor is a meaningless person. Meaningless people aren't leaders.

These governors are fools not to see Palin as a key ingredient in rebuilding their party. The woman received over 50 million votes as a vice-presidential candidate. That is something the party can build on, provided they aren't so blinded by jealousy that they try to muzzle her.

This is old turf for Palin. She became governor by running against a Republican. She isn't afraid to duke it out with people in her own party. The jealousy can only serve to elevate her by giving her underdog status, with a dash of sexism thrown in. It will keep her name in the papers and her face on TV. If the other governors in her party don't see that their jealousy and anonymous tips will backfire, then they are delusional.

Governor of Texas Rick Perry tried to muzzle Palin today by cutting her news conference short. She was supposed to field questions for 20 minutes, but only took 4 questions by the time Perry ended it. According to CNN he said, "We were running behind schedule."

Yeah. Sure, Rick. And if you were taking questions as the de facto leader of the party?

Men.

(Photo: AP)

What This Is All About

Socialism and anti-American sentiment dovetail nicely in the dreamland of Europe. This opportunity must have them wetting their pants. A financial "crisis" and a liberal senator in the White House? Game on, baby:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel last month attacked ``greed, speculation and mismanagement'' and today called on counterparts to agree an end to ``blind spots'' in the financial system. Rudd said ``the root of this malaise'' lay in the ``twin evils'' of greed and fear that went unchecked because of ``obscene'' failures in oversight.

While defending capitalism as the ``most efficient system ever created,'' Sarkozy has described as ``over'' the view that ``everything could be solved by deregulation, free competition and the market.'' The French president said today he will argue the dollar ``can't claim to be the only currency of the world anymore.''

And:

Mr. Bush called the weekend G-20 meeting in Washington in response to persistent and widespread calls among European leaders for tougher regulation of the global financial system, and particularly what some European leaders view as the overly-volatile U.S. system. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for example, has referred to the U.S. devotion to free-market principles as "mad" and has called for an international financial regulator.

The Death Of Freedom in Australia

Two things: 1) How long until this catches on with the governments of other supposedly "free" countries? 2) When is the last time you heard a politician proudly use the word blacklist?

From the Herald-Sun:

AUSTRALIA'S mandatory net filter is being primed to block 10,000 websites as part of a blacklist of unspecified "unwanted content".

Some 1300 websites have already been identified by the Australian Communications and Media Authority...

"The pilot will specifically test filtering against the ACMA blacklist of prohibited content, which is mostly child pornography, as well as filtering of other unwanted content," Senator Conroy told Parliament today.

"While the ACMA blacklist is currently around 1300 URLs, the pilot will test against this list - as well as filtering for a range of URLs to around 10,000 - so that the impacts on network performance of a larger blacklist can be examined."

Bronzino: Unwanted content?
Though an absolute disgrace, this tyrannical crime is hardly surprising. Anyone who thought China would corner the market on internet censorship was kidding themselves. When people can speak freely, governments get nervous.

"But no, Sean, it's about protecting people from child pornography." Uh-huh. You can buy that line of bull if you want to. Just tell me what the "other unwanted content" is going to be?

With this new rule, Australians have sold their souls as a free people. They should be ashamed of themselves.

(Psst. Hey Aussie guys. Quick. Screen-capture this criticism so you can read it in the future.)

The New Blacklist

(Update: this post is about the artistic blacklist in the United States. So it's the New US Blacklist. This shouldn't be confused with the new Australian Blacklist of internet censorship. I know it's hard to keep track of all the good things people are doing to protect you, but you'll figure it all out eventually).

"I am leaving California Musical Theatre after prayerful consideration to protect the organization and to help the healing in the local theatre-going and creative community. California Musical Theatre will continue to welcome with open arms all staff, artists and audiences who collaborate in the experience that live theatre does best – to lift the human spirit."

That's part of a resignation letter by Scott Eckern, former artistic director of the California Musical Theater. It's difficult to see how Eckern could have written that paragraph without vomiting. The only reason he wrote the letter and quit his job is because the creative community does not welcome people with open arms.

Eckern donated money in support of Proposition 8, California's measure to have marriage be defined as a union between a man and a woman. The vote passed last week.

Since donations are public record, Eckern was outed as - horrors! - a man with different views than the theater scene's heavy hitters. Word spread quickly through the theater crowd thanks to an email campaign. The email campaign asked people to boycott the theatre. The writer of Hairspray said that none of his productions will ever run in an Eckern theatre again. Seeing the writing on the wall, Eckern issued an apology and donated $1000 to the Human Rights Campaign, then called it quits.

So now we have a whole new blacklist, drawn up by people that delight in making movies bemoaning blacklists.

Our "artists" expose themselves yet again. They aren't about being different and accepting others that are different. They're about accepting those that are different but think exactly like them.

Politics transcends everything. Art, love, gender, family, friendships. What are these against a baying horde of goodthinkers?

I feel badly for Eckern. I've been in a lot of green rooms and attended many a theater party. The amount of hugging, backslapping, and "I love you" shrieks is staggering. And nobody means it. Just ask Eckern.

Poor guy. He actually thought he belonged to a diverse, accepting group. Then the group calls him a bigot and he feels the need to grovel and shell out another $1000 in an attempt to get his "friends" to love him again. Just another day in the land of tolerance.

Note to Eckern: keep your money, and your pride.

Touchy, Touchy

Another bigshot media butthead protests too much and comes off like a...well, a butthead. This time it's Shepard Smith, a Fox anchor who looks like a model on a box of Just For Men.

Drown your self pity in scotch and Cronkite re-runs, pal.

"Preposterous" to call out the media darlings?

Get bent, loser.

A WWI Vet Remembers

A good piece about Henry Allingham can be found on the BBC's website. At 112, he's Britain's oldest man. Here's a good highlight:

Henry Allingham is one of a tiny number of people left to tell the story of the moment the Great War ended.

He was on active duty with the Royal Navy Air Service in Flanders when World War I ended on 11 November 1918...

Mr Allingham remains blunt about his future and says candidly that he cannot expect to go on forever.

"I mean at this age... I've got to give way some way," he said.

He cannot explain the secrets behind his long life - but has said it could have something to do with "whisky, and wild, wild women".

A photo from his younger days shows him looking a lot like any number of my English buddies. Sounds like them, too.


Photos: BBC

Remembrance Day, 2008

Again, a thank you to all of the troops fighting beside their friends and countrymen, and to those who gave all.

Here's a piece I wrote for Remembrance Day last year:

The poppies, of course, are a symbol of WWI dead thanks to Canadian John McCrae. He was a surgeon-major during the Second Battle of Ypres in 1915. After a friend died, McCrae sat down on the back of a truck and wrote a poem, casting his eyes on the poppies and graves around him.

The poem was In Flanders Fields, and it almost didn't get published. McCrae tossed the poem away, but it was retrieved by another offer. In England, the Spectator rejected it, but Punch picked it up and published it on December 8, 1915. Three years later, McCrae (now a Lieutenant Colonel) died of pneumonia.

From Ypres, to Starbucks. I'm not sure if the Starbucks chick knows what the poppy means, but I don't really care. I just hope that she goes on wearing it every November.

More...

Clint Goes Old School

Clint's back, and he's got a gun in his hand. I guess he decided to prove he can still open up a can of whup ass.



Clint on the new movie:

"I'm a weirdo in it. I play a real racist. … It's a great time in life (to do that) because, you know, what can they do to you once you're past 70? There's nothing they can do. But it also has redemption. This Hmong family moves in next door, and he has been in the Korean War, in the infantry, and looks down on Asian people and lumps everybody together. But finally they befriend him in his time of need because he has no relationship with his family."

My Dream Of An Empty Toronto

The United States always makes bigger headlines than Canada in Canada. The elections only proved it. Ask any Canadian their opinion on the Canadian election of 4 weeks ago and you'll get some mumbled stuff about Harper (that's the prime minister), and Stephane What's-His-Name (Dion, leader of the Liberal party, no relation to Celine) and that's about it. But ask them about the US election and man, are you in for a ride.

The two elections are an interesting case study in the phoniness of Canadians. On the one hand, they elect Conservative Harper. On the other, they praise the tax-and-spender Obama. Holding a political discussion with a Canadian is like being in a room full of bipolar weirdos. Then again, it gets harder every day trying to nail down exactly what Canadians believe is "liberal" and "conservative."

Toronto, however, is different. They know liberalism only too well. Toronto is one city in Canada where it's all tax-and-spend all the time and they love it. They must, because they don't do anything to stop it.

A few weeks ago I was renewing my driver's license. I was behind some guy getting registration for his car. This was in Burlington, about 50 km from Toronto. The lady handed him the bill and the guy said, "Whoa, whoa! $145?" And the lady said, "You live in Toronto." The guy said, "Yeah, so what?" And the lady said, "There's another $60 charge for having a car in Toronto. It started this year."

So the guy said, "To hell with this," ripped the bill in half, tipped over the computer, trashed the place, got on his cell to the mayor's office, gave them hell...

Wait a minute. Sorry. That was only in my dreams. What the guy actually said was, "Oh." He reached into his back pocket, handed over his credit card, and that was that.

I loved him for that "Oh." That is the perfect slogan for a Canadian: "Oh." Not, "Oh, yeah, you sonofabitch?" Not, "Oh? And when did they decide to give me another financial enema, pencilneck?" Just, "Oh." As in our national anthem, "Oh Canada."

Today I was driving on the unfortunately named Gardiner Expressway. It's the ramshackle road/bridge that goes across Toronto. The speed limit is listed at 90kph, but you seldom get there. They have digital signs on the Gardiner that say things like, "GARDINER MOVING SLOWLY TO LOWER JARVIS." We are expected to believe that some guy is sitting around keeping an eye on the highway, but we all know it's a crock because the Gardiner is always moving slowly to Lower Jarvis. It has for years, and it will forever. If I was the guy writing the digital sign, I would at least have some fun with it. How about something like, "ENJOYING THE $60 YOU SPENT? WE ARE. RATHER THAN SPEND THE MONEY ON WIDENING THIS HIGHWAY, WE'RE THROWING A KEGGER AT THE MAYOR'S HOUSE. WE'RE PARTYING WITH STRIPPERS WHILE YOU'RE STUCK IN TRAFFIC. LOSERS."

On the Gardiner this morning I heard the radio announcer say that Toronto residents will now pay an extra 9% tax on water. The newsman said that the water tax would go up 9% every year for the next five years or more. The DJ also said that the mayor's office was going to begin publishing a quarterly newsletter for Toronto residents. In other places, this is known as political propaganda, but in Toronto it's called "useful information." The newsletter will be translated into almost a dozen languages, including Chinese and Urdu. The cost? $800 000. The DJ said all this, then threw it over to the weatherman, who made no comment and instead told me that it was a beautiful day outside.

Oh.

One city councillor said the newsletter is very important. He can foresee people cutting out the newsletter's articles and putting them on their fridge. I hate to break it to him, but any man worth his salt (if there's any left) will be cutting out articles from the newsletter to save on toilet paper.

Last week I was sitting at a red light on an absolutely gutted Bloor Street. It's down to two lanes and nobody can move anywhere. It's an operation to beautify Bloor Street for your grandkids; in the meantime you'll have to live with a scene reminiscent of Beirut.

I killed time listening to more Toronto news and found out that Toronto residents have to put their garbage in city authorized garbage bins. It went into effect this week. No more garbage bags allowed. Every household will receive a grey box. If you don't put your garbage in the city's special garbage bin (and when the hell did we start using "bin" instead of "can?"), your trash will be left at the curb.

Says the Star: "Pick a small garbage bin and get a small refund of $10 a year. Pick a medium bin – it holds about the same as 1.5 garbage bags – and you'll pay $39 a year. There's a big jump in fees if you pick the large bin (equal to three garbage bags): $133 a year. Using the extra-large size will cost $190 a year."

In other words, if you have a large family to feed, you're being punished by the city for something that you already pay taxes on. That simple.

But wait, it gets better: 70000 people have yet to receive a garbage bin. Too bad. If you use garbage bags then your trash will rot in your driveway and you could receive a fine...unless you use city approved twist ties. In a gesture so satirical it makes even me uncomfortable, the twist ties are pink. The city will mail you the pink tags for a fee, but if you run out, you can always run over to Home Hardware. They're selling them.

Oh.

In other news, the Toronto government recently said they are going to demand that Tim Horton's stop using plastic lids on their cups. They say the lids aren't recyclable, while Tim Horton's says they are. The National Post: A city report on the proposed packaging policy said Toronto could buy an optical sorting machine to separate the two materials, but the equipment would cost $3-million and the processing could run about $1-million a year.

I've got an idea, buttheads. If you're so keen on green, how about you take the 800 grand from your propaganda rag, and 3333 of your $60 car registrations. Guess what? There's your million dollars/year for recycling plastic lids. Or you could continue to hose businesses until they decide it just isn't worth opening new stores, giving people jobs, and offering people products to buy.

All of this is just a sampling of one fine year in Toronto. A water tax hike of 9%. A vehicle registration hike of 60 bucks. A pay-as-you-go trash collection system that leads you to believe that none of your taxes ever went to trash collection before.

Toronto is a microcosm of what can happen under a socialist system. The city is determined to nickle-and-dime its citizens until they're completely bankrupt and dependent upon the government teat.

And what do the citizens do? Buy their little pink tags and say, "Oh."

There must be some kind of wrath brewing beneath all of this. Don't citizens remember that Toronto is a city and not an empire? My advice to every citizen of Toronto: move.

Someday, maybe, the people of this once great country will grow their balls back. We will recall that politicians are not gods. They are just people, and they are supposed to do our bidding. They should be afraid of us, begging on hands and knees for every dime we see fit to give them to pave the roads, pick up our garbage, replace streetlights, teach the police how to arrest criminals, and then stay the hell out of our way while we make a living and enjoy ourselves.

My dream is to one day get on the Gardiner and find it empty. I'll drive into Toronto and see empty roads, a few unrecycled coffee cups, a dozen empty construction yards, and the mayor, begging for change and offering pink tags for sale.

I will laugh, and finally have hope.

We're Not Done With You Yet, Sweetie

She is not going to be the next vice president of the United States. She has gone home to Alaska, to resume her role as governor. She's out of national politics for the near future.

Not good enough for the Republican boneheads that got pasted in the presidential election.

McCain's insiders need a scapegoat. They need to paint Sarah Palin as a hick, a slut, and an idiot. The press are only too happy to help, reporting rumor as fact, shirking their duty to give the same scrutiny to the new president-elect of the United States.

Carl Cameron of Fox News, quoting anonymous McCain insiders: There are stories that say she would look at her press clippings in the morning and throw what has been described to me as "tantrums." One of the more infamous stories that's now come out is there was a time when McCain staffers went to collect her at her hotel room and she had just stepped out of the shower and essentially met them wrapped in a bathrobe [or was it two towels? See below]. They were taken aback by that. They have suggested that she's a bit of a shopoholic and that on more than one occasion she would go out and buy clothes that to many seemed unnecessary because the campaign had already provided her with a very large wardrobe, uh, a wardrobe that famously rang up a bill of $150,000, mostly because they bought extra sizes to make sure everything fit.

Nice guys. Just in case the governor had a fat butt, they bought extra sizes.

Palin didn't order the clothes. They were bought for her by the campaign before she even hit the ground in Minnesota. But she's a shopoholic bitch. The anonymous sources say so.

There's more. From Newsweek: At the GOP convention in St. Paul, Palin was completely unfazed by the boys' club fraternity she had just joined. One night, Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter went to her hotel room to brief her. After a minute, Palin sailed into the room wearing nothing but a towel [but I thought they told Cameron it was a robe?], with another on her wet hair. She told them to chat with her laconic husband, Todd. "I'll be just a minute," she said.

Well, that settles it. She's a tramp, and her dumb hillbilly husband doesn't mind people checking out his half-naked wife.

Another report from anonymous sources says that Palin didn't know Africa was a continent, or which countries were in the North American Free Trade Agreement. So she's a bimbo.

I heard from a few anonymous sources today. They said all of the guys working on the McCain campaign were drunk, hooked on crack, and liked to frequent red light districts in every state they visited. All of the McCain campaign's men wear ladies underwear and sing show tunes in the shower.

Go ahead. Prove me wrong. I can't divulge my anonymous sources, so good luck.

Sarah Palin has refused to comment on the attacks against her, saying that she won't comment unless these anonymous sources identify themselves. She has called them "small, bitter people." AOL news says the stories are bogus and CNN half-heartedly says it's a crock. Says Palin, "If I cost John McCain even one vote, I am sorry because he is, I believe, the American hero." She says she loves him. She hopes she can work with president-elect Barack Obama to make the USA energy independent, and show him what Alaska has to offer.

Palin understands politics is a tough business. She's honorable in defeat and holds her head high.

Sarah Palin was the best man in the election, and she will be missed.

The "Katrina Effect"

Just a thought, but a few times today I have seen conservative commentators lament the McCain loss and reference Bush's "failure" after Katrina. Katrina was barely mentioned by either party's campaign, so it amuses me to see it coming out of the ashes now.

For the record: Hurricane Katrina had nothing to do with McCain's loss. Nothing whatsoever. Get over yourselves and look at the real problems facing conservatives.

If Katrina was a cause of McCain's failure you would expect to have seen McCain absolutely blown out (pardon the pun) in Louisiana. Instead, he carried the state with 58% of the vote, compared to Obama's 39%. Alabama? 61% to 39%. Mississippi? 57% to 43%. Texas? 55% to 44%.

Obama decisively lost the states hit by Katrina. There was no "Katrina Effect," or if there was it didn't come into play.

Move on and find a better excuse. There's plenty of good ones to choose from.

The World Is Suddenly One Big Happy Disneyland

First question that would be a real kicker to hear at an Obama news conference: "Dude. What's the story with your aunt? You going to kick her out of the country or what?" The answer would be fascinating.

But let's not dwell on the past. The future is where it's at, and we need to keep realistic expectations.

I got this next bit from Hot Air. This expert analyst thinks the USA needs a commander-in-chief that can give the country a hug, and Obama's just the guy for giving it. It's a nice touch, as it goes well with the Arms Are For Hugging bumper stickers you see from time to time. He goes on to say that Obama's election sends the message that, "We aren't the super-bully anymore," to the rest of "the world."

Oookay. That's fine if you want to please French ladies and Australian farmers. A little different if you tell the leaders in Tehran, "I just want to cuddle, you big sillies. Come 'ere."



Meanwhile, in other news...

Russia will place short-range missile systems on the EU's eastern border to counter planned US missile defence installations in Eastern Europe, President Dmitry Medvedev said on Wednesday.

"Iskander missile systems will be deployed in the Kaliningrad region to neutralise the missile defence system," Medvedev said.

"There will also be radio-electronic neutralisation of the new US missile defence installations from the Kaliningrad region," he added.

And About Time, Too

I used to read Rolling Stone back when PJ O'Rourke was doing a lot of their foreign commentary. Since he left the mag, I haven't had much reason to pick it up, especially when I found people like Britney Spears on the cover.

Don't get me wrong, looking at Britney Spears on the cover is a noble pursuit, but it doesn't mean I have to buy the magazine after checking her out.

Rolling Stone has always considered itself on the cutting edge of pop culture and politics. The mag went through its John Lennon loving Yoko and peace period, and it's glam-rock-hair-band phase, then its love affair with all things Bill Clinton, then it's absolute detestation of George W Bush...

It's funny that you sometimes think of Rolling Stone as a political mag first and a music mag second, but that's the way they've presented themselves since the 70's. Founder/publisher Jann Wenner was a heavy hitting fan of Bill Clinton's, and if memory serves me right he did all of the past decade's big political interviews in person: Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and Obama (who's already made the cover twice).

All fine, it's his magazine. Except when the mag gets back into music coverage by putting the Black Crowes on the cover. The Black frigging Crowes? If anybody puts the Black Crowes on the cover of anything, they deserve a smack.

Still, the cover of Rolling Stone is a coveted prize. The article inside the mag is only of limited value because Rolling Stone's readership isn't that big (somewhere around 1.5 million readers per bi-weekly issue), but the cover is large and it draws attention on newsstands. Basically any band that makes the cover has bought themselves some decent publicity at bookstores, tattoo parlors, and music shops for at least two weeks.

For young bands the cover means you've made it, and for actors it means you've reached the heights of fame. For politicians it means you've made the leap from politico to pop icon. For old bands it means you've reached legendary status, or your lead singer has dropped dead.

AC/DC, one of my favorite all-time rock bands, finally made the cover this month. It's about damn time, too. They've sold over 150 million albums worldwide. Their new album, Black Ice, already hit #1, and is set to be the best selling rock album of 2008. The first single from that album, Rock n' Roll Train, is on the radio all the time these days, and the band has another world tour going.

They're still on top, and it's good to see them there. They're a band that doesn't realize they're too old, and never learned that you're supposed to write cheesy ballads in order to sway the ladies and the critics. They have the same formula for every song: verse, verse, guitar solo, verse, end. Repeat for ten songs.

AC/DC has written exactly one slow ballad, with Dirty Deed's Ride On. That was over thirty years ago. Since then, nada. I always loved them for that. If a song isn't about sex, liquor, or rock, then AC/DC will not play it. That simple. And when you're in the mood for mindless rock, nothing else will do.

It's good to see Rolling Stone finally gave them credit for it.

Here They Come...

"Exit Polls Show Obama Big."

So says a Drudge headline. I haven't turned on the TV all day, so I assume they'll be trumpeting the same message on CNN et al.

Fine, fine. Dems always do well in the 1% of people being polled after they vote. Remember that the number doesn't include the people who told the exit poller to go and screw himself.

Polls in the east coast don't close for another 50 minutes, and west coast voters haven't left the office yet. This is the media's one last shot at controlling the election. So everyone should just stay the course and...vote.

Poll Vaulting (V)

In the past couple of weeks, I've been declaring that this year's polls are a load of BS.

I got this link from Steyn's post over at the Corner. The guy's name is Sean Malstrom.

Very interesting and quite bold. We'll see if he's right.

A taste:

In 2004, the media wisely delayed calling states when voting hadn’t been completed (such as Florida in 2000). There will be none of that delay in 2008. I suspect we will have many states called for Obama before the voting is even done. The state that will be erroneously called for Obama will be Pennslyvania. In Pennslyvania, all the Obama votes are mostly in the Philly and Pittsburg area and Obama will comfortably carry those areas. And those areas are the eastern part of Pennslyvania with the western part being more rural. With the ‘Obama leads’ that Philly and Pittsburg area comes in, and the myth that Obama is ahead 25 points (or whatever) in PA being believed by the anchors, they will call PA early. But once all the rest of the state votes, they will have to turn it into a toss-up. They will be EXTREMELY reluctant to call the state for McCain even when the votes clearly show he has won there (and he *will* win there.)

Update: I re-read the piece. I think the article is a pretty fascinating look at the whole election, and politics in general. I agree with him that Noonan, George Will, and other have shown themselves to be on the way out as "conservatives." They've been in Washington too long. I think his stuff on how polls are conducted is a must-read.

Why My Brother Is Cool

I write about politics all the time. It entertains me, and has the added bonus of irritating my buddies and girlfriends (they're virtually all Leftists, having never learned to take off turtlenecks or stop hanging posters of Paris in their apartments).

Anyway, I checked in to Facebook for the first time in quite a while, and naturally I'm seeing lots of politcal stuff. Not much from conservatives, because conservatives tend not to advertise, but there's a ton from the Obama crowd. People are proclaiming their Obamalove through their "status updates," such as, "I'm rooting for hope and change today. Yay Obama! Die, neo-con scum!" and the like.

Here's my brother's latest status update from the past week of incredibly important, utterly riveting political suspense. Politics is not his bag:

I'm hoping I didn't rush the decision to bet a lunch that the Tenessee Titans go undefeated this year.

And he's from the west coast.

My brother is cool.

The Waiting

They're on tenterhooks around the globe:

"Like many French people, I would like Obama to win because it would really be a sign of change," said Vanessa Doubine, shopping Tuesday on the Champs-Elysees. "I deeply hope for America's image that it will be Obama."

I'm sure the American people are grateful for your sympathy. Happy shopping, everybody!

Sweating the Rules

I was waiting to see something like this. It's John Podhoretz' hedge on the popular vote vs. the Electoral College. It's a bitch and moan you haven't had to worry about much until the Bush years.

I didn't expect to see an article on it this time around because everyone was expecting Obama to trounce McCain in both the popular vote and the Electoral College count. He still might, but I guess Podhoretz had some sleepless nights worrying that state polls might be wrong.

Some of my friends have trouble with the concept of the Electoral College. They think it's weird, and they're right. It's unique. They also think it's unfair, which is a laugh coming from people who vote in parliamentary systems. I tell them that they have to put the popular vote concept out of their mind when looking at a US presidential election. It's irrelevant, like applying the NFL rulebook to a baseball game. (And let me add, again: the place is called the United States. States. States. States. Get it? That word means something. Or should).

Yesterday, Podhoretz expanded on his worry that if McCain wins the Electoral College, but Obama creams him in the popular vote, there will be a "national crisis."

No there won't.

There will be only a half-national crisis: people that voted for Obama. But I don't believe that they will freak out and try to burn down the country.

Americans are very rigid about rules. Obama hopefuls would eagerly take an Electoral College victory over a popular win, because they know that's the way to gain the White House. Though they'd hate it if it swung that way for McCain, they know deep down that they'd praise a win on the same terms.

Says Podhoretz:

A McCain presidency under these conditions would be a model of institutional paralysis. With the exception of the veto, which McCain would of course relish more than any other presidential power, he would be among the weakest chief executives in modern times, if not the weakest. And it would be interesting to see whether the Electoral College itself could survive it. (It would be abolished, presumably, not by amending the Constitution but by passing laws in the states requiring electors to vote for the nationwide vote winner; such a law already exists in a few of them.)

That's quite a leap. Don't like the constitution's election rules? Change the playing field immediately. That dovetails nicely with Obama's philosophy that the constitution is a flawed document in need of changing, though he is running for the job of defending it. Besides, if Poderhetz thinks states like Texas would gladly forfeit their choice of president to toe some national line, he's insane. (And again, Johnny: States. Say it with me. You can do it).


Podhoretz is bipolar on the issue. In the same article, prior to saying that McCain would be a lame duck and the Electoral College would disintegrate, he write this:

It is true that the existence of the Electoral College is crucial to preserving some sort of balance in the United States between the small states and the larger states, and serves as yet another mediating institution — another means by which unbridled political power is checked.

All this is true. But it is beside the point in 2008.

And there we have the true liberal philosophy of the 21st century: "If it doesn't give me whatever I want, it must be bad." Poor John. He doesn't realize that the Electoral College is in the constitution to protect the country from people exactly like him: people that think unbridled political power is "beside the point."

Podhoretz believes that one year's election should supersede over two centuries of national law and tradition. Why? Because he exists.

Vanity, vanity, all is vanity.

Line-Ups (Or: Hand Me the Keys You...)

I've been reading a few blogs saying that the line-ups at the polls are stretching down the street. This could either be voter enthusiasm or, as one emailer to the Corner points out, an indication of election official incompetence.

Beware the Corner today, by the way; there's a lot of talk of booze - not champagne, but scotch, martinis, and the regular run-a-warm-bath cocktail recipes. One guy's even quoting a Time article from 1980 to give him comfort. Many bloggers there are also using inspirational movie clips to make it through the day, with stuff from Gladiator and Patton. Lame. I've got my own pick below.

I've been wondering about the long polling station line-ups for the last couple of weeks. I know Canada is a much smaller country than the US, but we have our act together compared to these clowns. Whenever I vote at the little elementary school down the street, I see a lot of people heading to the school with registration in hand, and lots of cars in the parking lot, but things are moving along fine. When I get to the school, I show my diver's license, wait about 20 seconds, go to the booth, vote, and walk away. Every year I get told to go to the polls early in case of line-ups, and every year the fifteen or so old biddies get the job done in a flash.

It is not a very difficult concept. If you have a lot of people voting, you should open more polling stations and hire more workers to man them.

Election tampering, though, is a different story. We'll see how many of those tales we get today.

Speaking of line-ups, here's a clip that always makes me crack up. Warning: foul language. Turn it up so your kids can hear.

It Only Took 8 Years

From the Hollywood Reporter:

"There's no way to get around it," CBS News senior vp Paul Friedman said. "If one man gets 270 electoral votes before the West Coast polls are closed, we're not going to pretend (he doesn't)."

Phil Alongi, who runs special events programing at NBC News, agrees.

"If you project a state and (the candidate) reaches the electoral vote, what are you going to do? Lie?" Alongi said. "We will project a state when we're comfortable with the projection. If one of them hits the required 270, you have to report that, and you can't hold back."

Reporters, worthless swine that they are, have learned nothing from 2000. You didn't really believe them during the Gore/Bush fiasco when they said they'd change their evil ways, did you?

Funny. Back in the days when people had to wait weeks while news of votes was brought in by horseback, nobody seemed to mind. We're just so much more sophisticated now.

How Elections Work in Media Land

From Howard Kurtz, chief janitor of media bile over at the Washington Post:

Better plan on an early dinner tonight.

It is possible that, at 7 p.m., network anchors and their map manipulators will make projections that strongly suggest Sen. Barack Obama is on his way to winning the presidency. But if Obama fails to capture a handful of key states by 8 p.m. or so, then Sen. John McCain has a shot at getting to the magic 270 and everyone could be in for a long night..."These are canaries in the coal mine," said Charlie Cook, the veteran analyst and NBC contributor. "When they start dying, there are huge problems for the Republicans."

"If Obama wins Virginia, he's won the election," said Tad Devine, who worked for John F. Kerry and Al Gore.

Got it. If you live in California, click on the news at 4:00 pm. If Charlie Gibson tells you it's over, forget voting and just head to bar. The gods have spoken.

Kind of puts the lie to their whole "make sure to vote" crap, doesn't it?

Joe. Put Down The Crack Pipe.

Joe Biden at a campaign rally in Missouri today:

"You know why I think Jill likes Claire McCaskill so well, Senator McCaskill? Jill is one of five sisters, Claire is one of three sisters. And I tell you what, you women raised with sisters are different than women raised with brothers," Biden said as both women joined him on stage.

"My sister is smart, runs every one of my campaigns; is beautiful; graduated with honors from college; is homecoming queen. But she's a ... she is what I call a 'girl-boy' growing up, you know what I mean?"

"And I tell you what? Girl-girls are tougher than girl-boys," he said. "But there's one important thing I noticed.The great thing about marrying into a family with five sisters, there's always one that loves you. 'Cause you can count on splitting them a bit. You know what I mean?

"I shouldn't be going off like this, but -- hey, folks, 37 more hours, 37 more hours," he then said.

Let the Games Begin

The US election starts tomorrow. Weird, huh? With all of the hot air blown around over the past 2 years, you could be forgiven for thinking that the election began in 2006.

Not so, my poll addicted friends. The campaigns and punditry started in 2006. The election only kicks off tomorrow and - a chadless God willing - it will end tomorrow, too.

Naturally the press will want to see it finished much sooner than that. As always, watch for the small numeral in the corner of the screen followed by a percentage sign. That is the amount of a state's polls reporting in. Note that the number is so small you can't read it without headbutting your TV set. When the number reaches 4 or 5, news "analysts" will already be calling the state for Obama or...well, leave it at that.

The media's been playing that game for decades, and I guess they always will, but I never get used to it. It is patently absurd to have news stations "calling" an election for someone when a night shift voter out west is still in the sack. Hence, why the news stations consistently call states early for the Democrat. Maybe the idiot Republicans in flyover country will see the election's already in the bag, roll over, and go back to sleep.

Here's my no BS assessment on what I think of the politicians in this race. It's no secret by now that I do not like the idea of an Obama presidency. But I am also on the record long ago as saying that I didn't like McCain and thought he might even be a little nuts.

My breakdowns:

Obama:

- Inexperienced. He's been in the Senate for three years and has spent two of them on the road, running for president.
- Liar. His relationships with Ayers, Wright, Khalidi and Rezko. Everybody he knows is just another dude from the neighbourhood. Yeah, yeah, these days it's a smear to bring up a guy's friends as examples of his character, but what can I say? It's how I often judge people.
- Corrupt. His campaign has been receiving fraudulent donations for months, and the security checks on his website were purposefully turned off long ago. All of the money his campaign and the media have been bragging about is extremely suspect.
- Liar. He said he'd take public financing, then didn't. Because he didn't feel like it.
- Weirdo. He wants to raise taxes during a recession, and brags that his global warming platform will bankrupt the coal industry. Sounds great, huh? So I guess the past two months have taught us that bankruptcy is actually a good thing.
- Hypocrite. His aunt lives in public housing in Boston, while he's written a couple of bestsellers and lives high on a senator's salary. So much for spreading the wealth around. Then when told his aunt is an illegal immigrant, he says she should get on the boat and go home. Listen to his heart, boom, boom, boom.
- Ineligible. He thinks the constitution is in need of revamping, though the job of a president is to protect and defend the constitution.
- Grating. Every one of his sentences is broken into thirds, fourths, or fifths. "Today is the day...when we will...make real change happen...in America...Sometimes I think...to myself that...I should learn to talk...so one paragraph...won't take a half...an hour...Sorry."
- Still not in my spellchecker, so all of my Obama blogs get bogged down with "skipping." I find this mildly amusing. Surely he's famous enough to have his name in the spellchecker by now.

McCain:

- Old. As I heard a radio guy say the other day, he's old in all the ways you don't want to be old. He isn't grandpa-on-the-rocking-chair old, he's grouchy-uncle-in-the-garage old.
- Experienced. But that scares me, too. An "experienced" senator can be like a good wine or a rotten turnip. More often than not, it's the latter.
- Liar. Says "my friends," a lot, even when talking to reporters. John, you're protesting too much.
- Slow. He isn't dumb-slow, but he's super duper slow with a comeback. Many former presidential contenders would have had Obama for lunch during those debates. Instead, McCain wanted to go back to talking about "wind, solar, tide, clean coal..." blah blah blah.
- War hero. Five years in a POW box should count for a lot. The media don't care about it much because war is icky and Vietnam was bad, but I still think the man deserves a hell of a lot of credit.
- Noble to a fault. Defended Obama against any smears during his rallies, calling him a decent family man and all the rest. That's fine, but he also wouldn't touch Rev. Wright and seemed as if he'd never heard of the guy. I know a lot of people that think the Republicans ran a smear campaign this year. They're mostly my Canadian friends, who think Republicans are Satan's spawn. Even if you believe the Republican smear stuff, you can't pin that on McCain.
- Never gets that the press aren't his friends. They loved him when he was second fiddle to Bush in 2000, because their hatred was reserved for Bush. This year, McCain couldn't get over the fact that they now didn't like him. It cost him badly.

My "Hopeful Foreigner" pick: McCain. Like Thomas Sowell, I think the American people are better off choosing a disaster over a catastrophe.

Why not Obama? He's a liar, and he's corrupt. But more than that, I don't like him because I loathe a politician that smiles while saying he wants to raise taxes. It really is that simple. Might not be sexy, but there it is. I don't care who they say the new taxes will hit, because they always end up hurting everybody. Taxing the wealthy doesn't mean jack. Big shots will make their money back as soon as they can, usually by screwing the little guy with layoffs, pay cuts, and higher prices in the aisle. If the taxes get to be too high, the wealthy guy will say to hell with it and open a factory in Dublin or Tianjin. Bye-bye more jobs. And it isn't just the big shots that will get stiffed. Check out the impact Obama's plans will have on a couple of guys in Pittsburgh.

My electoral vote throw in the dark: McCain squeaks it out, 277 to 261.

If McCain wins, watch for a lot of racism stories in the press, and don't even think of seeing a celebration of the first woman vice-president in history. If Obama wins, watch for hosannas from here to Japan to Sydney. The fraudulent donations story will disappear like a righteous fart in the wind, and people will fall to their knees at the dawn of a glorious new day.

Well, at least in 3 months. There's still that matter of another president leaving office. Then when the income taxes go up...and the first coal mine goes under...and the capital gains tax goes up...and Iran, Russia, North Korea, Al Queda, the Taliban, and Venezuela decide to try their luck in the No More Cowboy sweepstakes...