One Less Thing To Worry About

According to Damn Interesting, a human being exposed to the vaccum of space without protection will not instantly swell up and explode. I know, you saw OUTLANDER and TOTAL RECALL and that's always the way it goes down, but in fact, it'd be more like this:

For about ten full seconds– a long time to be loitering in space without protection– an average human would be rather uncomfortable, but they would still have their wits about them. Depending on the nature of the decompression, this may give a victim sufficient time to take measures to save their own life. But this period of "useful consciousness" would wane as the effects of brain asphyxiation begin to set in. In the absence of air pressure the gas exchange of the lungs works in reverse, dumping oxygen out of the blood and accelerating the oxygen-starved state known as hypoxia. After about ten seconds a victim will experience loss of vision and impaired judgement, and the cooling effect of evaporation will lower the temperature in the victim's mouth and nose to near-freezing. Unconsciousness and convulsions would follow several seconds later, and a blue discoloration of the skin called cyanosis would become evident.

So you gotta admit, that's good news. Kubrick got it right again. The article goes on to point out that after you lose conciousness and turn blue, you'd still be good for about a minute and a half before they had to get you into the airlock and administer oxygen, and then you'd probably suffer no permanent damage. Of course, past that your blood would boil and that's a hard condition to treat. But hell, you at least have time to wave frantically to the folks inside, maybe tap your keys on the window and mouth the words "let me back in" which is more than we've been told to expect. Small favors!

(hat tip to Mental Floss)

But Terrorists ARE Like the Joker, a Little

Finally got into an IMAX theatre this weekend to catch THE DARK KNIGHT. Ledger does walk away with the movie handily, which means I guess he has already taken it to his grave. But the whole enterprise is seriously thought-provoking, which is why I don't mind that it's as talky and cheerless as it is. By the way, between the talking, stuff blows up. Frequently.

SPOILERS AHEAD! If you haven't seen the movie, stop reading this and instead, read this. Lithwick makes the same point using a TV show. More elequently too, I suppose.

Okay, you've seen it. Good. Little long, wasn't it? How 'bout that Harvey Dent! Am I right? Whew!

A week or so ago, the WSJ published an editorial attempting to draw a parallel between Batman and G.W. Bush. I laughed my head off when I read it then, but now that I've seen the movie I can see what he's talking about. Like the Batman, Bush isn't afraid to use a few extra-legal techniques in the service of a larger good. In fact, among others things he tortures suspects to get information and taps the cell phones of the entire population of Gotham. And these things do indeed wind up saving the city from a terrorist, albeit a terrorist who wears clown makeup.

So the parallel is drawn, very obviously. I can see a conservative watching this movie, finding comfort in it and concluding that the filmmakers are rooting for the current administration, calling them heroes. And it's true, right up to the ending.

Where Batman and Bush part ways is here - Bush will do everything to avoid the consequences of his transgressions. Where Batman accepts the resignation of his technology guru and exiles himself, even taking the rap for murders he did not commit, Bush continually blames others for his policies and lobbies to change laws that we've respected for centuries.

Since we're using movies to define the moral high ground, let's make it clear - Batman isn't a hero because he tortures and spies. He's a hero because he knows how truly wrong these things are and he's willing to accept the consequences. A movie character who behaves like Bush and doesn't include that second part is Darth Vader.

******************************************

Update 8/07/08 - Patrick Leahy, who is IN the THE DARK KNIGHT, laughs off the Bush comparison but says this: "I do grant the parallels between Superman’s nemesis Lex Luthor and the Vice President." 

Leap Of Lack Of Faith

Conspiracy theories are troublesome, because their very implausibility feeds their believability. Of course it seems unlikely... they're COUNTING on you to think that! So I'm relaying this one with a whole shaker of salt for ya. Don't spill any or it's bad luck.

So a guy named Bruce Ivins died Tuesday night, an apparent suicide. He was at the center of an Justice Department investigation into the mysterious Anthrax attacks that happened just after 9/11. You remember, a few congressmen and the Florida offices of the National Enquirer received envelopes containing weapons-grade Anthrax? Ivins was an Anthrax researcher, according to Glenn Greenwald, "where he was one of the most elite government anthrax scientists on the research team at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID). "

My left-wing blogosphere pals are running amok with the implications of this - Ivins obviously took a bullet for Dick Cheney to avoid implicating him in the attacks! I don't take the whole thing that far, because we don't know Ivins was the culprit to begin with, and even is he was there's nothing, nowhere, that indicates he needed any help to put Anthrax in an envelope and mail it to people. Along with a note that implied he was a Muslim terrorist.

The scenario I subscribe to is that Ivins acted alone, and the administration hopped on the attacks and rushed to blame them on Saddam Hussein, like they did with the World Trade Center attacks. Still, the only thing that slows down the Cheney-ordered-anthrax-terror scenario is the idea that Cheney has respect for human life and the law. So you can see how one would make the leap. Plus, unlike the WTC conspiracy theory, only two people had to be involved in this for it to work. And one was an employee of the other.

Read the Greenwald piece, because he's pretty evenhanded about it and doesn't draw weird conclusions, unlike the commenters. Just don't get all goofy on me. We have to stay frosty, people.

Attack!

Look at this comment!

It sure looks as if the camp of the BO is playing a lot of defense; not good so early on.

The guy didn't give a name (he's ashamed! Or, he simply forgot) but this infuriates me. A man surrounded by mosquitoes is going to be on defense too, and the attacks on Obama have a distinctly small, annoying quality to them. My own criticism of Obama, and the left in general, and even myself, is that we're not going as negative on McCain. The great thing about him is that all we have to do is throw his quotes around. We can prove any negative about McCain - we either use something he said yesterday, or if it's not unpopular enough we can just use something he said in 2000 or 2004.

Because the straight-talk express goes in whatever direction the votes are, don't ya know. McCain was both against the war, then for it; he was against the way the war was being fought, then for it, then he was against it and for it again.

When the Obama/McCain debates happen, I hope Obama has the good sense to demand access to Google during them. McCain can have it to; he's not good with the internets. Maybe he can demand access to a stack of newspapers instead. Anyway, when McCain says "I've always been for the Bush tax cuts" it would be handy to have access to the video of him saying otherwise.

Plus, do we want to go to the trouble of electing a guy who'll die of old age while in office? And what's with the trophy wife? Even Bush Sr. had the sense to be married to a women as unsexy as he was. It was far less unseemly.

And why do we want to put the position of Commander In Chief into the hands of a man who had the bad sense to be captured and imprisoned by the enemy? How is that better than no experience?

And isn't it a little presumptuous of him to keep calling us "his friends?" How does he assume that we're all his friends? Doesn't he have to EARN that first?

I saw footage of him at a prayer meeting and he clearly wasn't into it - I'm pretty sure the man is an Atheist. And someone I know said he would happily perform an abortion if he only had the time. And let me remind you, he destroyed the chances of Mike Huckabee, the guy the far right would have preferred, to be president. He is trying to sink the Republican party.

Okay, that should get the ball rolling.

Is Paris Burning?

More YouTube linkage! I have been commenting elsewhere about the McCain oppo ad seen below.

All the attention is going to the truly odd decision to include clips of Paris Hilton and Brittney Spears near the beginning. It's a little sequence that goes starlet*fade*starlet*fade*Obama. The obvious message, the one that my right-wing pals are buying, is that like these other two figures, Obama is famous and good-looking but without substance. I had responded that the juxtaposition was a sneaky attempt to make us afraid that Obama would take our white women. We're all wrong.

Mea culpa - I hadn't actually seen the ad.

I had read about it but we don't have flash installed at work, so I didn't get to actually WATCH it until just now. The blondes are nothing more than magician's assistants, meant to distract us from the real message of the ad.

Watch it again, and pretend you don't speak English. Without the narration, which has little to do with the visuals anyway, you're left with this - a mob of millions of people chanting Obama's name, ominous music, and say, wasn't he speaking in GERMANY last week?

That's right, the point of the ad is that Obama is Hitler. Not the cerebral point but the important, deep-in-your-amygdala point. Kudos to the clever ad people who figured out how to keep you from noticing. I'd say it was the people who got Bush elected, but I can't imagine McCain would work with those guys after the 2000 primaries. He sure did learn from 'em though!

Earthquake!

5.4? Big deal. I won't roll outta bed for anything less than a 6.5.

If' it's anything below this, I just don't care.

Liberal Media Hates Obama More, Study Says

This issue probably fascinates more than it ought to. Really, how can you prove that the entire Main Stream Media has a bias one way or the other? Individual examples abound, but on the whole, it seems impossible that all the commercial news enterprises would lean one way or ther other. There's no profit in alienating the other half of your audience. Except at Fox, which has proven that there is money in skewing right as long as you lie about it.

However, this study (hat tip LA Times) suggests that the media hates McCain less than it hates Obama.

During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.

What does it prove? Nothing. Honest, nothing at all. Except that whatever bias you think there is, most likely you're mistaken. It happens that there were more juicy negative stories floating around during the study, and the media like trouble. Had McCain been accused of being brainwashed by Christians AND being a secret Muslim, I'm sure numbers would have been closer. By the way, speaking of brainwashing, prisoner of war? Why isn't anyone a little worried about this happening? Because John McCain is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life, that's why.

Reevaluating Steely Dan's Copycats

I'm going to back down from my snarky tribute band comments last week to give props to PretzelLogic, the Steely Dan tribute band at the park tonight. They rock! And it's not the easiest material to rock with.

I suppose I'm more impressed with these guys because if you hear a Beatles song done well, it's easy to ignore. The sound of Beatles is like breathing, it's so familiar. Steely Dan, to quote Steely Dan, is the mechanized hum of another world. It LOOKS more difficult.

Badly typed on my iPod

** Nota Bene: Early in the show, these four teenage boys on skateboards stopped near me (I was situated near the edge of the crowd) and one of them said, "who's playin'?" I told them it was a Steely Dan cover band. They laughed and skated away. With them, they took the last trace of my perceived hipness.

Man Bites Dog - Hot Dog!

I have been looking for my golden counter-argument to this liberal-media-bias talking point about the disparate coverage given to Barack Obama's campaign. After all, if dozens of reporters show up for Obama's appearance in Baghdad and only one greets McCain in New Hampshire, there can only be one explanation, right? What could drive the far left nutroot journalists out to see McSame, anyway?

1. "Look Smitty! It says here McCain will be touring New Hampshire! And after Obama made that big deal about McCain not being in New Hampshire for over 900 days! That's news! Send all our guys out there now!"

2. "New Hampshire! We've got a bureau out there anyhow, covering the recent rash of bears coming out of the woods and knocking over trash cans. Let's send a few to this McCain thing."

3. "This is the story of the century - old white guy runs for President Of The United States! We gotta cover this like Dutch Boy paint!"

Point is, I guess, you can't blame everything on political bias. Look here, where MD complains that the coverage of John Edwards sex scandal isn't getting the attention of Larry Craig's sex scandal. Why is that, I wonder? I suppose that maybe there's less irony because Edwards didn't chair several committees seeking to limit heterosexual activity. I suppose because Edwards looks so much like a Ken Doll, the only surprise is how long it's taken to get a decent sex scandal outta him. Larry Craig, on the other hand... let's face it, it's news that a guy who looks like that would be involved in ANY kind of sex.

And by the way, wasn't it the liberal media who ran with the Clinton sex scandal stories for five solid years? Maybe it was only three solid years. In fact, this Edwards thing is such a non-issue that even Warner Todd Huston hasn't brought it up yet, and he's the king of liberal media bias accusations. He thinks the Weather Channel has an agenda. He avoids ESPN and gets all his sports from Fox.

Counting down to WTH's posting.

Right Meets Left In the Neutral Zone For Steaks

So Madeline's Dad is in town this week (actually he's in region, but I persuaded him to drive into town) for dinner. Actually, he persuaded me to come out and meet him, because he's a more sociable guy than I am. In any event, he drove from Orange County and I drove from the San Fernando Valley and we met at Sunset Plaza, one of the least gay parts of West Hollywood.

We wound up eating at BLT Steakhouse, a pricey but exquisite steak place that doesn't, of course, serve BLT's: the initials stand for Bistro Laurent Tourondel. If you want bacon, you better order it raw, wrapped around a duck liver. I went widely off my diet for this meal. I think even my goatee gained weight.

MD (not his real name) is quite a guy. Pretty tall, and not a foaming-at-the-mouth conservative in real life. Then again we had the good sense to keep off politics, sticking to show biz, appreciative murmurs about the attractivness of the waitresses, and college drinkin' stories. After a while one of his old college buddies, also visiting from out of town, showed up and we all had good times.

It went so well, maybe I'll try to have coffee with Warner Todd Huston next.

Tribute Bands: A Tribute

Last night I attended another free concert in the park - this time it was TICKET TO RIDE, an excellent Beatles tribute band. I wasn't close enough to see how they handled the string parts but I'm guessing that they either used some sequenced playback or they had an unseen faux fifth Beatle (maybe "George Martin" in the backstage area) handling the trickier parts. And of course, maybe there was a "Murray the K" around the front, shilling for them. No "Yoko" in sight, which is good for band stability I guess.

Enjoyable but it got me thinking of tribute bands in general. I'm totally down with the concept of a Beatles tribute band. For one thing about half the songs they performed were never performed live by the Beatles themselves - too complicated, and you wouldn't have heard them over the hysterical screaming anyway. So Ticket To Ride perform the valuable service of allowing the communal live enjoyment of this material. Next week, however - a Steely Dan tribute band called REELIN' IN THE YEARS.

I'm going to see them, but I have serious reservations about this. The obvious one is, of course, the need for a Steely Dan tribute band when Steely Dan is out there, healthy as a horse and available for bookings. Maybe not for a free concert in the park, but if you offer them enough money they'll happily play the Greek Theatre a few miles down the freeway. The other reservation is about the quality of the imitation. It's not so difficult to duplicate the Beatles's smooth Liverpudlian harmonies, but Donald Fagan's chalky whine is largely considered inimitable. Probably because, really, do you WANT to make your throat do that? So there's that, then there's the fact that Le Dan sound the way they do because they used the best studio musicians and did 1000 takes for every song. They are the Stanley Kubricks of music. That's why they take 25 years to make a record.

A few months ago this girl took me to a ZZ Top tribute band at a local club and we got to go backstage to meet them as they were gluing on their beards and practicing their "circle pointing finger" move. And I was thinking with the money they spend on spirit gum, they could be buying better amps. With the time they're spending learning to keep the hair out of their strings, they could be writing new material. And again, ZZ Top is still available. Not only that, they look almost exactly like they did in the eighties. Though under all that hair, they probably look like Aaron Spelling or something.

If the R.I.A.A is suing 90-year-old ladies, 6-year-old girls and in one notable case, a networked printer for file sharing on the grounds that it takes money out of the pockets of the artists, why don't they go after tribute bands? These guys are keeping Steely Dan and ZZ Top from getting gigs, aren't they? Maybe Instead Zeppelin and Grey Sabbath are the real reason why the music industry is failing. Go get 'em boys.

Famous Shawties

I'm 5'8", which is said to be average for my generation, but all my life I've been sensitive about my height. For that reason, I'm pleased to see this on Mental Floss: A list of famous people shorter than I. Aw, what the hell, I won't make you click it.

10 Famous Short People
1. James Madison, 5′4″ (Shortest President ever. He only weighed about 100 pounds.)
2. Charlotte Bronte – 4′9″
3. Charlie Manson – 5′2″ (Who knew such a little guy could be so terrifying?)
4. Danny DeVito – 5′0″
5. John Keats – 5′ and ¾ an inch
6. Edith Piaf – 4′8″
7. St. Francis of Assisi – 5′1″
8. Pablo Picasso – 5′4″
9. Alexander Pope – 4′6″ (Pope had tuberculosis which stunted his growth.)
10. Martin Scorsese – 5′3″ or 5′4″ (Sources vary.)

I wonder where George Stephanopolous and Michael J. Fox would be on this list? I don't care, the point is I tower over 'em. If only I could say the same about my younger brother, or practically everyone I went to high school with. I matriculated in the land of the giants.

My Plan to Drop the Price of Gas

For the US to bring down the price of oil significantly enough to benefit me as well as Exxon we'd have to do the following:

1. Open up ANWR for drilling. Not just ANWR, but all the coastlines, all the national parks, all the places that the oil companies have been spoiling for over the years. This will increase supply to meet demand.

2. Probably double refining capacity. Every summer when the price of gas goes up, a press release is issued saying that the refineries are processing as much as they can, but the demand is greater. And one of them is always being repaired during the peak summer months. We want to keep that price stable, we need redundancy in the refinery system. Besides, they system we have now can't handle even the small amount of American oil we put through it.

3. Forbid the oil companies, who are investing their money in new drilling and refineries, from marketing American product outside the US. This isn't actually that big a deal because the demand is there. However, it will likely mean a lessening of imports as they shift that product to other markets. If we produce more oil and import less, the net effect could be the same amount of oil. So for the scheme to work, we have to import the same amount and increase domestic supply. So look for increased regulation of the oil industry. And sorry, we have to give up the dream of "less dependence on foreign oil."

4. Okay, here's the tough one: convince the oil companies that it is in their best interests to charge less. This will be a hard one because they have just spent all that R&D money, plus as businessmen they will be turning down profits, leaving money on the table. After all, if we're used to paying X for gas, why sell it to us for X/2? Unless the Government steps in to the oil business in a big way (much like they do with the savings and loan business) we can assume the prices will be about where they are now.

As you can see, this plan depends a lot on the good graces of the oil industry. In fact you can say that it boils down to whether you think Bobby or J.R. is in charge. My money is on J.R. but hey, who knows? Maybe these guys feel bad about charging what they do now. As a goodwill gesture, they could drop the price of a gallon a couple of bucks for a while.

Of course, if you believe that the price of oil is purely dictated by supply and demand, we could test that by bleeding the strategic oil reserve a little. Just to prove it.

Maybe I Won't Move To Orange County

This billboard, with the Twin Towers burning on the left, has gone up in Orange County, Florida. Oddly, the incident referenced happened while Republicans were running every branch of government. Kind of counter-intuitive, I'd say.

What is the Republican Song anyway? Queen of Denial.

Psychological Hypothetical

I've heard this said: that merely ANNOUNCING that we will allow domestic drilling will bring down the price of oil. And yet (hat tip to commenter Nicole at CROOKS AND LIARS) today when President Bush rescinded the executive order put in place by the flaming liberal OTHER President Bush to prevent offshore drilling, the price of a barrel of oil climbed slightly. So what does this mean?

A. Announcements like this have no effect.
B. People assume that anything Bush does to help will make things worse.
C. Speculators aren't driving the price of oil as much as oil companies are.
D. It's Clinton's fault.

You tell me. I'm flexible.

Snow And Cartoons

First a note to people watching for these things - farewell to Tony Snow, a classy guy and thorough professional, better than both his predecessor and his successor. My good wishes go out to his loved ones.

I also have a few good wishes to the publishers of THE NEW YORKER, which is reaping a mailing-list-full of controversey due their satirical cover of a Muslim Barack Obama giving his camo-clad militant wife the terrorist fist jab in the oval office. Come on people, lighten up a little! I have to admit this is the first time I've disappointed by one of Obama's responses - the correct riposte would have been "Michelle and I laughed our heads off when we saw this." Ah well, maybe we ARE a nation of whiners after all.

Funny people everywhere are dying a little.

HoJo Just Now

7/14 note - the sound file failed to upload, which is probably for the best given that I was probably attempting to break a dozen laws and singlehandedly bring down Howard Jones' post eighties career by allowing you to hear him without making you give him money. He sounded just fine, by the way. A little sunny and un-ironic for my taste but the dude knows his way around a keyboard-based hook. And after all, things could only get better.

Liveblogging Howard Jones

I'm at Warner Park, where the Valley Cultural Center is presenting Howard Jones. As usual I'm too far away to SEE Howard Jones, but he sounds great. Sample to follow.

Writer's Block

I don't know what to tell you guys... I tried to write something yesterday (it was another one of those stop-picking-on-Obama things) and I just couldn't complete a thought. Maybe it's the heat. Maybe I want Obama to purify himself in the fire of crazy Republican attacks. (Republican and Jesse Jackson, that lovable pixie.) In any event, nothing about O.

I just went through two pages of WONKETTE and still no ideas. I give up. I'm going have some butternut squash ravioli and a diet coke. Talk to you later.

I'm Your Shill

I didn't realize it until just now, but I'll sell myself out for a handful of seeds. Or you know, almost anything. For example, last month a publisher contacted me out of the blue and offered to send me a book if I'd blog about it - and look, I did! It's actually a pretty cool book and it looks great on my black kidney-shaped bachelor pad coffee table, but the point is I wouldn't have given it a second thought in a bookstore. Not that I go into those places any more. NOBODY does.

Meanwhile, a week ago I attempted to attend a record release party at an exclusive club in Hollywood and didn't make it in. I wrote to Chelsea E, the sexy chanteuse who threw a party at a place so exclusive that it wouldn't even let her own guests in, and she was suitably mortified. She mailed me the gift bag they were giving out (that I would have received had I been allowed inside) and it contained candy, a scented candle, a CD, a green condom, and a T-shirt, which I wore to the park yesterday for the 4th of July concert.

So attention, purveyors of merchandise! If you got it and it's free, I want it! And I'll talk about it! I only own two t-shirts which are devoid of advertising. Your message here! I'm always looking for low-carb tasty snacks! I'll happily test software or gadgets for you and report the results. And the results will ALWAYS BE FAVORABLE. 

And ladies, do you wish you had a little more of a reputation? I can help you out with that.

Look, I might as well do this. I'm running out of crackpot political opinions fast. And once Obama is president, what am I gonna complain about? Endorse my efforts to endorse you! 

PS: You know what? I think while I'm waiting for my laundry to dry I'll head off to The Stand (5780 Canoga Ave in Woodland Hills, a block north of Burbank) to pick up my a free hot dog and fountain drink. They were passing out coupons at the park yesterday.

The Latest Political Outrage

The latest campaign season outrage has to do with Gen. Wesley Clarke's comment on Face the Nation this last weekend:

"Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President."

How dare he say such a thing!

Well, he's right of course. Not every POW is qualified to run the country. Not every Veteran is qualified to run the country. In the last election the same people who are expressing outrage over this comment voted for a non-veteran over someone who fought in Viet Nam... who VOLUNTEERED. So obviously they agree.

McCain does have all kinds of qualifications to be president, and Clarke is just pointing out that service isn't one of them. Obama is also qualified, and I just happen to prefer him because he's less about the fear and more about the hope. 

It'll be fun to see how many people we all wreck in the next four months on the way to the White House, instead of simply listening to the candidates and judging them by their own merits. Fun in a slowing-down-for-a-bad-traffic-accident kind of way.

Build Your Own Aphorism

South Carolina Teen Decapitated by Roller Coaster as He Attempts to Retrieve Lost Hat.

The Aphorism Of The Yard Sale

You're driving down the street in the suburbs, and you spot a yard sale. Prominently featured, a painting of dogs playing poker. As a person, you may attempt to judge the person who is selling. Don't! Here's why. 

You may think them idiots for buying the damn painting in the first place. But then again, they are offering it at giveaway prices now, so they are smart enough to get rid of it.

Aphorism as follows: 

YOU CAN'T JUDGE A PERSON BY THEIR GARAGE SALE.

The Club Night Post Script

Writing from home now... I don't know what the lesson to be learned from this experience is... except perhaps this. To get into that kind of club, you have to really want it. I didn't. I don't really like that kind of music, I'm too old to hang out with those people, and I don't like fun . I'd have been a tourist.

I was only there because I had won a guest list spot on an internet radio show, and I had only called the show because my friend hosts it. It's a recipe for meh. So it's for the best really, and I'm home at a decent time. I'll go to bed and forget any of this happened.

Wish I'd gotten better pictures though. Apologies for that.

I give up

Look at all those people! and they're ON the list.

Well, its more cool to me to not make it into a club. I woulda just blogged all night anyway.

Hurdle #2

I'm told I'm not on the guest list. Not that it matters... They're only letting girls in right now anyway. This Club Opera is a tough nut to crack!

Doormen

Made dark and mysterious by bad lighting.

Where the action is

Not a big turnout so far.

Tough club

So I'm waiting in line... A second ago they just let Chelsea E. in. She's the talent!

Hurdle #1

So I just asked the doorman when they're letting people in..."10:15" he said with a sly smile. Get there early, th invites said! Good grief.

Hollywood is scary at night. I'm in my car until I can find a block with less hookers.

Club Opera, Hollywood

It's really really RED.

I'm a Creep, I'm a Weirdo... What The Hell Am I Doing Here... I Don't Belong Here

Tonight, in a few minutes, I'm leaving to go to a record release party in Hollywood. It's clearly not my area of expertise, but what the hell... it beats TV. I'll try to send pics and liveblog the event, or at least my failure to get into the event. Watch this space!

The Rock Of Conservatism

Republicans - they are the stable ones. Agree or disagree with 'em, at least you know where they stand. They're conservatives, and once they take a position they dig their heels and stick with it! Positions like this:

Karl Rove tells O'Reilly that it's wrong to out a CIA agent. “[T]hey’ve got a very callous view about our nation’s security and interests,” Rove charged.

John McCain doesn't think terrorists should be allowed habeas corpus rights, because the Nazis weren't. "There was no habeas at Nuremburg and there should be no habeas for Osama bin Laden". He is at odds with the guy who said this in 2005: "Now, I know that some of these guys are terrible, terrible killers and the worst kind of scum of humanity. But, one, they deserve to have some adjudication of their cases. And there’s a fear that if you release them that they’ll go back and fight again against us. … [I]f it means releasing some of them, you’ll have to release them. Look, even Adolf Eichmann got a trial. " Of course, that guy was living in a pre-9/11... no wait, it was a post-9/11 world, but now it's a post 9/11 world that's three years MORE post-9/11, and that matters. Somehow.

Republicans don't understand why their criticisms of Barack Obama don't stick. After all, not only is he a Muslim, he's also been brainwashed to believe everything his Christian Pastor told him. He's both too black AND too white. He changed his mind on what kind of campaign contributions he will accept, and it's awful if a candidate does that. He's a secret terrorist, and like all terrorists he's hiding in plain sight by running for President. He proves his hatred of America by not wearing a flag lapel button, as repeated pointed out by people who must also hate America.

Me, I think the reason these accusations don't stick is because they keep getting knocked off by opposing accusations.

Me, hard at work

Testing temote blogging!

Cry Havoc! Let Slip The Ugly Dogs!

As promised, the Worlds Ugliest Dog contest was held this last weekend in Sonoma. I give you the winner - Gus!

True to form, Gus is a Chinese Crested breed, hairless except for a bizarre doggy mohawk, skinny as hell and unable to hold his tongue in his hideous head. The winners of the contest have uniformly been like this, and I'm beginning to think the judges are playing favorites.

The press release contains what may be the best pageant quote of any contest ever.

Said (Gus' owner) Jeanenne, “I’m just in shock. We came so far and are so happy that we can put the winnings towards Gus’ radiation treatment. We’re just thrilled.”

There he is now / prepare for the worst / the ugliest dog in the un-i-verse.

Al Gore's Place - The Old Switcheroo!

Just a little addendum to this Al Gore's energy usage post from yesterday. In the comments someone posted a link to a spreadsheet entitled 100,000 Chernobyl-type Nuclear Reactors Required to Sustain Gore Lifestyle! At first I thought it was Onion-style satire; then looking again I realized the premise wasn't that Al Gore himself was using that much energy; it's how much energy we'd need if we all lived like Al Gore.

It's a little insight into the right-wing mind. You know how Bill Bennett was the arbiter of morality until it was discovered that he has a huge gambling addiction? And you know how those couple of senators were on committees to make things harder for gay folk even though it turns out they themselves were secretly gay? Well dig - obviously, Republicans resent Al Gore because he owns too much property! 

Obviously we're not going to make every man, woman and child in the world as rich as Al Gore, so the only way they'll be satisfied is if we seize his land and turn it over to, I don't know, the workers. After all, the workers control the means of production! And all this "tax breaks for the rich" nonsense - they know it isn't sustainable! They're making sure the middle class bears the burden, because once the revolution comes we'll ALL be middle class!  And don't tell me they're against Soviet-style surveillance techniques! 

I'm just kidding. The kind of people who are in favor of stuff like this would also want some kind of Berlin-style wall along our border.

ANWR Factoid

I would have normally reserved this for a snide comment in a right wing blog, but none of the ones I read have brought up Bush's speech this morning. In it, Bush entreats Congress to relax restrictions of offshore drilling, because oil prices are too darn high.

You will recall a few days ago I blogged about ANWR, and I just saw another factoid about it. If we approve drilling off the coast of Alaska (which can't possibly hurt the environment because they're really, really careful with this stuff nowadays) the price of oil will drop 75 cents. That is, per barrel of crude oil. Today a barrel of light sweet crude runs $132.50. So you can look forward to a corresponding drop at the pump. In about five years, once they put all the equipment in.

The source of this statistic is a Department of Energy study commissioned by Rep Ted Stevens, of Alaska. I bet if we also drill off the coast of Florida and California, we can conservatively put enough extra supply in the pipeline to drop the price of a barrel by $5.00. So presumably that's, what, almost 4 cents a gallon? That oughtta help! Five years from now, of course.

And of course, thats assuming that OPEC doesn't compensate by raising the price of their oil. And that the Governers of California and Florida (both Republican) don't fight the plan tooth and nail because, you know, they get a lot of income out of those unspoiled beaches.

But hey, I got plans for that four cents - there are stamps to buy.

======================

PS - the communists at the Wall Street Journal say it would take 20 years to go fully online and the price of a barrel of oil might drop 75 cents by 2025. Of course, since the Supreme Court says we have to give enemy combabtants rights and everything, we'll all be dead long before then. We might as well leave the wildlife alone.

And Cheney Has Shot More People While Under The Influence of Alcohol Than the Average American

Maybe I'm too easily distracted. But get a load of this!

Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month 
Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovations 

Look, it's our good friends at The Tennessee Center for Policy Research! They're back again. You may recall last year they put out a similar press release that I took issue with. I questioned the numbers they were publishing, but in fact those were accurate numbers. It's the analysis which was slanted and stuffed with lies like a falsehood burrito. 

This biggest lie, of course, is the comparison. An average US home may consume X amount of electricity, but the average US citizen is neither a former vice president, board member of Apple, Nobel Prize Winner nor millionaire. Gore's house is A LOT BIGGER than the average American home. 

Furthermore, the average home in TENNESSEE uses 1.5 times the national average, so they're not even comparing Gore's house to others in the same climate. And their source, this table by the EIA, appears to calculate energy consumption by PERSON, not household. So let's do the math based on average people per average home, versus people in Gore's mansion. This includes live-in domestics and aides, if he uses some rooms as offices.

Now they say he's using 10% more energy than before the renovations. 17,768 khw a month, to be precise. The press release from last year? 22,619 kwh. I'm kinda having a problem with that math. See, I'm almost certain 17 is LESS than 22. I think 12%, but like I say math and I aren't best friends. My guess is they're comparing the numbers now to the months before the renovations were complete, which would make sense because things would be shut down for rewiring.

I know, if you're conservative you already stopped reading, because you like the simple cheap shot rather than the fair comparison. "Press 1 For English, 2 For Deportation" is all you need to know. Tell you what though - Clinton was a detail guy and he balanced the budget. Bush legendarily "doesn't do nuance" and he calls anything he doesn't understand Fuzzy Math. This math is so fuzzy, you might as well stick a couple of ping pong balls in it and call it a Muppet.

I'd Like To Say The Whig Party was a Mistake

Al Gore has publicly endorsed Obama, at long last. I'm predicting zero impact from this, though it's kind of comforting. And good for completists, the kind of people who collect all of the things in a set. "Wait! I also need the Han Solo frozen in Carbonite figure!"

But really, the subset of Democrats who preferred Hillary, but were on the fence between Obama and McCain, was pretty small. Hillary's own endorsement presumably took care of them. All that Gore can add is helpful spreadsheets and a PowerPoint show which explains why Obama is the right guy for the job.

Meanwhile, David Frum suggests that McCains VP should be Rudy Giuliani. Oh please, please, please let it happen. McCain has to secure that all important "war with Iran until the end of time" vote. It's what Americans want!

Anwr, You Hang Your Hat

Hat tip to WHERE ARE MY KEYS for this timely editorial cartoon, implying that high gas prices would be alleviated if only we'd let the oil companies drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Damn those liberals and their love of nature!

Thing is, I read this on Free Republic and you gotta trust them: the problem isn't scarcity of oil, it's lack of refining capacity. We need more refineries! And this same thing turned up in a pamphlet that I read published by Union 76.

So if we had more domestic crude oil, it wouldn't help at all would it, because we couldn't refine it. And of course, it wouldn't be available for another five years. In that time we will all probably find less expensive alternatives, thus eliminating the need to screw with the environment. Leave the prices where they are - this problem will solve itself.

The Triangle Snaps Shut, At Last

Oh how I've longed for this day. Ever since primary season started and I decided that I'd rather have an optimist than a revenge-bent fearmonger for my candidate. I've been hoping that Obama could pick up enough delegates to win the nomination. And now, at long last, he has.

Dude's not president yet. And we are Democrats, so even though the current president sports historically low popularity and his presumptive successor proudly boasts of wanting to continue almost all his policies, we could still blow it in a big way. If we've learned anything this year it's that you can't take sure things for granted.

I'll be interested to see how this affects the polls. As you know, rightside bloggers have boasted for half a year that McCain was polling higher than either Democrat. Now that there is only one Democrat, that will probably change no?

Something we won't know until November is how many people were bluffing during the primaries. Ann Coulter famously said that if McCain wins the nomination, she was going to vote for Hillary. Presumably now she would have to simply not vote. Assuming that she's allowed to vote at all after the last time. We also have the legion of Hillary supporters who claim they're going to vote for McCain rather than Obama. Some probably will. Some, like Amanda Peyser of the New York Post, clearly have always hated Hillary but still claim they were going to vote for her. Sure, Amanda.

There is no question that the right was pushing for a second Clinton candidacy, and now they're angry and frustrated. They didn't get the person they wanted on either side! How does a depressed attack dog behave? Stay tuned.

Whither Hillary? My hope is she'll put her skills to good use, and by skills I mean dirty politics, skullduggery and thirst for vengence. And most importantly, I hope she'll apply them to McCain and Co, not Obama. After all, Obama has only tormented her for one year; the Republicans have grinding away since 1992. Hillary Clinton could be our party's Karl Rove; if that's overreaching then she at least could be our party's Dick Morris. (I know, but that was then. This is now.)

Ironic, isn't it? We start the race earlier and earlier, and when we come down to the finalists they only get 6 months at each other. Think of all the money we could have saved! No, I have no idea how to fix that one. All I do know is that it's rapidly becoming a country where every candidate is either on the side of the corporations, or the trial lawyers and unions, because they're payin' for all the advertisin'. Which means that no matter who loses, TV networks win. Hmmm... I'm going to give this some thought.

Throw Back the Little Ones

Just caught this item on Crooks and Liars excoriating David Brooks for saying that Barack Obama doesn't seem like the kind of guy you'd see at the Applebee's salad bar. C&L's objection? APPLEBEE'S DOESN'T HAVE A SALAD BAR, dammit!

I have to admit that Brooks may or may not be off base with his remark, but C&L is on track to have the biggest non-issue ever with the item. Come on! It doesn't prove Brooks is an idiot, it merely proves he doesn't eat at Applebees. I am a common schlub, and I don't eat at Applebee's either. Come on people, focus! Pundits say far worse things factually. Rather than worry about the existance of an obviously metaphorical salad bar, perhaps we could instead point out when pundits say that John McCain has little in common with the current president, or that Obama is a terrorist. You know, that kind of factual inaccuracy.

Everybody Hates Scott

I came across Scott McClellan on PBS's NEWSHOUR Friday night. After a solid week of reactions to his new book, he seemed like the old Scott again - dodging questions, answering in vague generalities, defensive and sweaty. The whole interview went a little like this exchange:

JEFFREY BROWN: You use terms like "shading the truth." Is that a euphemism for lying or purposely misleading?

SCOTT MCCLELLAN: Well, I think that this is the example that there are many good people that come to D.C. for the right reasons, to get things done for the American people and make a positive difference, but they get caught up in this permanent campaign culture that exists and they lose sight of some of the more important objectives of working across the aisle.

He held onto that "permanent campaign culture" talking point like a Titanic survivor holds onto a floating steamer trunk. What he was trying to avoid, apparently, was singling out George Bush. Maybe he feared it would make him look like a disgruntled former employee. Maybe he feared a sheaf of death threats left at his hotel room. Speculation of course, because he didn't say ANYTHING definite at all.

I wouldn't blame him if he were disgruntled, by the way. He insists that he didn't know he was lying to the American people as press secretary, but on some level he must have known. You can see it in the panicked whites of his eyes. He was too easy to read. Therefore he made a lousy press secretary, and they let him go. But if I were him I'd be angry that they ever put me in that position in the first place.

Now of course, the criticism levelled against him from the right is that he is disloyal, and that he's making it all up now, but he was telling the truth while he was press secretary. Strikes me as an unlikely scenario (the practical definition of press secretary has never been "teller of the truth") but they're running with it anyway. As for disloyalty, it goes both ways. But McClellan, spinning his book to keep the president out of it, showed so much loyalty on Friday that you'd think the interview was on Fox News.

By the way, have they sat him down on Fox yet? That would be a pretty interesting 45 seconds. 30 if they give him to O'Reilly.

--Amendment, 6/3: Lookie there! McClellan appeared on O'Reilly last night! I'm tempted to assume that the administration concluded that putting that 'tude in mild-mannered Bob Dole's mouth just didn't work and they decided to bust out the big gun. In any event the substance was the same - "how dare you say those things, and show disloyalty!" The substance was not "you're lying!" When you can't kill the message, destroy the messenger.

Hillary's Meme

It's like I told Madeline's Dad - she may be the first, but she won't be the last.

Where Are Your Prayers, Atheist?

I knew there was something I wasn't seeing behind GWK's comments! It's not just about good wishes, it's about prayer. As you noted, G, I am an atheist; and therefore please take my remarks here to represent an extremely small segment of the American population. We're under 5% the last time I checked; Mac users have a bigger market share.

Well, obviously from this angle, my praying won't help Sen Kennedy at all. Will yours? I'm not sure. Just because I don't believe in God doesn't mean I KNOW there is no God. After all, i can't offer any physical evidence. Sure I could be wrong - my non-belief is its own way an article of faith. So I hope you can believe me when I say I don't feel superior to you because of your beliefs. More power to ya. Besides, maybe you're part of a collective good vibe, a healing energy which works in ways we don't understand yet.

Getting past the vibe scenario though, I don't think praying for a public figure would help. Einstein famously said "God doesn't play at dice;" and I'd suggest that God is also not an American Idol judge. He isn't deciding who lives or dies (or who is saved or not) by how many "votes" that guy gets. Otherwise, Regan would be alive and Carter would be dead, yes? I don't believe in him, but even if I did that would just be a crazy system.

Onto other things! I've deactivated the CAPTCHA as an exeperiement. We'll see.

Where Are Your Good Wishes, Leftie?

"Great White Knight", erstwhile commenter, wondered yesterday why it took me so long to wish Ted Kennedy a speedy recovery. I suspect there's more behind the question than simple curiousity; though the full point hasn't been revealed yet, it probably has something to do with the left having no compassion.

Well, best to just be honest then and let you make of it what you will.

Ted Kennedy, like all public figures, is a kind of abstraction to me. I don't think of him as a real flesh-and-blood person. He's a character in the vast soap opera which is political news. Intellectually I know he really exists of course. I don't imagine GWK is in a different situation either. His expression of good wishes probably had as much to do with demonstrating his compassion as it did with actual compassion. Maybe I'm wrong and GWK is emotionally invested in Ted Kennedy; in which case you have my sincere apologies sir.

Assuming I'm right though, the compulsion to publicly wish well to a public figure is something I didn't feel here. I don't feel I have to prove that I support the people that you already know I agree with. It's useless information to you. You should take it for granted. In fact, I'd regard these kinds of statements, to a degree, as grandstanding.

Of course, there is also the other side of the coin - what good does it do Ted Kennedy? Is he going to spend the coming months reading blogs to see who was nice to him? I hope not. I hope a guy in that position has better things to do. That's the kind of behavior Nixon would have engaged in, looking for the absense of comment and devising ways to get back at me.

That's it, GWK. What do you think?

I Hate You, I Hate You, I Hate You, Get Well Soon

I have to admit this - the right is a lot better about being nice when their opponents are stricken with illness. I see this point made again and again - Tony Snow gets brain cancer, the commenters at Huffpo are divided 50/50 between "I hope he gets better" and "I hope he rots in hell." Ted Kennedy gets a brain tumor and the LGF commenters are almost all "I hope he gets better. I disagree with his politics, but my prayers are with him."

I've been skimming around looking for vile Ted Kennedy comments and I've only found two - one guy buried deep in the LGF comments said "Too bad, I was betting on the liver." Insensitive but a funny line. The other was nationally syndicated columnist Michael Savage. But hey, he makes his bones offending people - he may not even MEAN it.

The positive spin for the left (and it's an awfully weak spin) is this - at least we're consistant? I mean, one thing I read today from commenter AMERIDANN on Where Are My Keys said "I have called him not only a traitor, but a murderer. I stand by those comments. (But) my prayers and my wishes go out to Senator Kennedy and his family." And this seems to be a common attitude on the right. Before this week, you didn't see an awful lot of "Senator Kennedy's policies are wrong, but I respect him as a legislator." How am I supposed to reconcile this U-Turn?

For the record, people who pilloried Tony Snow when he was well and then ridiculed him when he was sick are the worst kind of Neanderthals. Like most people, Snow is a decent guy with a difficult job who believes in what he did. It's cool to disagree with his beliefs but stupid to hate him for them. Hate, as a rule, is stupid. Try to avoid it when you can.

And for the record, good luck and best wishes to Senator Kennedy. May he get better and legislate happily for another fifty years.

A Weirdly Apropos Quote

The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern.

- Lord Acton

Some Of My Best Friends Are Racists

The Obama-demonization strategy is pretty firmly ensconced now, and has probably gotten all the traction it's going to. We knew the RNC was going to Demonize Obama, because that's how they deal with threats - they demonize 'em. Have you ever noticed that all the people to speak out against the president are fame-whores, have uncontrollable anger issues, are criminals, or just plain insane? Gosh, there has to be something WRONG with you if you disagree with us!

To summarize, Barack Obama must not be president because people he has associated with are filled with hate toward white people. Therefore he himself must hate white people too.

Oh, where do I begin?

Okay, the Wright stuff. Whatever Wright has said, no matter what you think, it doesn't follow that Obama buys it too. In fact, he's publicly repudiated it. Yet he attended the Church for so long - how could he NOT buy it? Well, there are Catholics who eat meat on Friday and practice birth control. There are Jews who drive around on Saturday not wearing those funny hats. In fact, there are lots of them. You go to Church to connect with God - sometimes you're gonna disagree with the guy giving the sermons while you're there. Does that mean you keep shopping around until you find a Pastor you agree with 100%? You tell me. I'm an Atheist.

Next this: Obama scandalously appears on the same magazine cover as Louis Farrakhan, Elijah Muhammed, Johnnie Cochrane, Luthor Vandross et all. Obviously Obama must be just like these people (Luther Vandross?) because his supporters think he is. This is a little crazy on the face of it, but let's throw a hypothetical out here, h/t to Ed Shultz. The KKK is likely to endorse John McCain and/or Hillary Clinton over Obama. So don't you want to vote for the candidate who isn't with the KKK? I mean, duh. In fact, we'll have to eventually replace ALL the white candidates now.

Still, the crazy guilt-by-association garbage is working with some people, and it's important to figure out why. There's nothing wrong with a candidate hating a group of people, as long as they're the right people. Obama says he hates nobody, but let's ignore that for now. If he hated Muslims, he'd be doing okes with us because they're our enemies after all. (All of them? Let's ignore that for now too.) If he hated homosexuals he'd still probably be just fine with the majority of Americans, who are either hetero or self-loathing closeted homos. But he's accused of hating white folks. Which I guess would include his own white half. So why is that bad?

Because it makes him uppity.

Look, I call 'em as I see 'em. This talking point at its base is a warning to black people to keep quiet or we'll make them sit at the back of the bus again, just before we throw them under it. How dare they think there is still Racism in this country? If we elect Obama, they'll never stay in their place.

Right wing readers, please please please convince me I'm wrong. I don't want to be right about this one.

Oh How I Wish...

...I had time to write.

I've Lost 15 Pounds! Ask Me How!

Don't bother asking - I'm going to tell you anyway. And at the end, you'll also learn my secret to losing weight - it's not just diet and exercise!

So this year I made this New Year's Resolution - I was going to whittle down my ectomorphic body to the recommended BMI for my height, which is 5' 8". I was, at my peak, around 180. This is the result of a lack of exercise coupled with depression and comfort-eating from my recent divorce, and my lack of a bathroom scale.

So once I bought a scale and assessed the damage, I devised a strategy. Since I worked pretty close to my apartment, about 3 miles, I decided that I could get there by bike. After all, I could either waste 12 minutes a trip driving there or I could profitably burn calories for half an hour riding. * So outfitted with the bike, a helmet, and a heart rate monitor (more out of curiosity than anything else) I commenced burnin' off that excess avoirdupois.

For the first two months, that was my whole strategy - daily exercise and more sensible eating. That helped me lose 10 pounds. Additionally I felt more alive and I've developed a nice tan, something my pale countenance needed aesthetically.

Caveats to this plan, by the way - obviously if you have a forty minute drive to work, you're screwed as far as the bike trip goes, because it'll take you around 6 hours. You can't listen to the radio because you need your ears to detect the traffic sneaking up behind you. And Canoga Park in the dead of winter, even in the middle of LA, is surprisingly cold. Antarctica cold. Mr. Freeze couldn't take that kinda cold. Bring a sweater.

Around the end of March, I realized I was stalling at around 172 pounds, 10 pounds short of my goal. Since I'm around actors all the time now (I'm in a play this month and another play next month, but I swear I'll stop after that!) weight advice is pretty easy to get. My friend Art gave me the obvious advice: "Stop with the carbs." No bread! No sugar.

These would be difficult things to give up, but my weak will power is easily trumped by my vanity so I have manged to curtail both bread and sugar with relative ease. Especially bread! My director Karen also suggested that I avoid all white foods, which is pretty weird but essentially good advice.

On the exercise and no carb program, for the last two weeks I've lost about .6 pounds a day, and as of yesterday I'm officially out of the "overweight" BMI zone and in the "normal" zone. Normal is a term of art here; we're Americans! I've been normal this whole time.

But what is the secret? I've been through this before and when someone asked me that I just sighed and said "no secret - diet and exercise." But that's not really true. Those things alone won't do it because the diet thing flies out the window when you start feeling hungry. The secret, the thing that will make you lose the weight and keep it off, is this:

Find ways to like the hunger.

That's your only hope. I'm a little hungry about half the day. I would reach for a snack normally, but I've convinced myself that mild hunger is just your body's way of telling you it's burning off the fat. Mild hunger is exercise that you don't even have to do! Extreme hunger, low-blood-sugar-fainting hunger, is a different story and you should just open up that bag of Wonder Bread and enjoy. But most of the time, listen to your body, thank it for the helpful info, and plan your trip to the beach. On a bike. And use sunscreen.

* You probably don't live so close to your job, but you may live that close to a mass transit access point! Good exercise, and you'll be reducing your carbon footprint, and you'll be ahead of the curve when gas goes up to $5.00 a gallon on Memorial Day. Ha ha, just kidding! Unless it does, in which case I'm predicting.

Damn Dirty Apes

The Evolution in Schools debate continues to fascinate me. Even as a liberal Atheist, I have to admit I see wiggle room here. After all, no scientific theory is ever completely proven. So when I hear this morning that Florida (the state located under a burning Bush) is requiring teachers to present arguments against the theory of evolution, I can't whip myself into a high dudgeon. I'm contrarian by nature; I always want both sides of the argument.

The problem, I suppose, is that we have to keep religion out of the schools. Therefore, the syllabus will have to be something like this: "Scientists suggest this happened, but others say that's impossible because of this." "Who are the others?" "Ask your parents." Which is a fine sequence, come to think of it.

The people who fought to get this into the school system are clearly hoping for an endgame in which Christian creation stories are advanced; but what about Muslims? What about Buddhists? Each of these myths differ enough that they would deserve equal time, but I don't think these guys are fighting to have Islam taught in science class. In fact, I can't imagine they would let that happen without a fight. An ugly fight. Warner Todd Huston is whipped up because he fears the encroachment of Sharia Banking Laws in the lending industry. What's he gonna say about the Koran in 3rd Grade?

Why not just teach just Christian theory in public schools? Because that gives the United States an official religion. Even if you want to ignore the plentiful constitutional language forbidding that, you only have to look at Governments who DO have an official religion to see that we're better off without one. Even the Communists, who had an official absense of religion, ran into trouble. We're in Iraq right now in part to prevent a religion-based government from forming there. Granting an exception because YOUR religion is really really cool doesn't solve the problem.

As much as I hate slippery-slope arguments (they're fear-based), dragging God into science class is a luge race to oblivion.

Happy Earth Day, Half The Country!

"It's April 22 and everybody knows today is Earth Day / Merry Christmas / Happy Birthday to whoever's being born." - Dramarama

I just want to take a moment to wish a happy day to everybody who isn't actively campaigning against environmental prudence, energy saving, and alternatives to fossil fuels which could destroy us all if they don't run out first.

Happy Earth Day to those who believe that the oil companies don't have people's best interests at heart; to those who don't think CFC bulbs are a political issue, who don't think that the majority of the worlds scientists are lying because they're liberals. Happy Earth Day to Al Gore, and to all those who don't make an issue of the fact that a guy with a bigger than average house uses more power than a guy with an average-sized house. Happy Earth Day to me, because I ride a bike to work.

Happy Earth Day to the Earth. Good luck to ya, baby.

No Happy Earth Day to the RNC Talking Points crowd, because you're trying to kill me.

Conan The Contrarian

Kudos to Arnold S*****************r *, the governer of California, for being a Republican and yet recognizing the value in easing off the fossil fuel use. He appeared on FoxNews over the weekend (HT to Crooks and Liars for the video) to explain that Republicans who deny global warming and fight green technology are missing the boat.

I think they’re just trying to protect business. And in the end, they’re hurting business. Because we’ve proven in California that you can do both, that you can protect the environment and protect business... I think people realize now, ‘wait, this does not hurt our economy, this is actually a big plus’ because we’re creating jobs through green, clean technology.

True dat, Arn. Additionally, a lot of global warming denyers somehow seem to think that only people would be troubled by climate change -- "oooooh, it's too hot here!" -- without considering that the economic effects are the real problem. It's not such a trivial thing to move a soybean farm three hundred miles north, pal. And if Allstate has to pay to replace expensive beachfront property because the ocean levels have caused seepage into that 4-car garage, then you're paying more insurance. Global warming causes inflation! Get it? That's your free-market solution.

Meanwhile businesses are the biggest user of fossil fuels, to heat their buildings and refrigerate their food and transport their goods. If we don't develop alternate energy solutions, and the price of gas keeps rising, businesses fold. Instead of being choked by regulations, they are bled by Exxon. Either way there's less competition, and prices go up. The sun has a few million years of life in it, why not tap some of that?

S*****************r * recognizes that there are incidental benefits to using energy more efficiently. He is the anti-Cheney. I'm betting the rest of the party won't pick up the message and run with it any time soon, but it's kinda like the denial of evolution and the insistance the Al-Queada was running Iraq -- it's a talking point that mainly helps Democrats because it makes the Right look a little dim-witted. So keep it up, boys, at least until November!

* I'm saving energy by not spelling it out.

The Not-So-Great Debate

You know, I don't watch debates. They are not debates in any real sense of the word. They're more like sales meetings. Candidates appear and try to look like they might be good elected officials, but they seldom answer a question straight, let alone actually debate something. It's so frustrating that I've just given up, in the same way that I've given up on trying to devine the state of the union from the State Of The Union address.

From what I'm reading though, ABC managed to find a way around my objections with Wednesday's Democratic debate. Knowing they wouldn't get substantial answers about policy questions, they simply refused to go near those kinds of topics. They avoided any topic with substance apparently. Obama got hit with a lot of questions about people he knows who aren't running for President, Hillary was asked why she kept lying so much all the time. You could boil the first 40 minutes of the debate down to variations of "You're a really bad person, aren't you?"

And the answers were variations of "No I'm not, but my opponent might be."

Eventually they settled into the usual "what would you do if..." with the usual response of "I won't exactly say, but the Republican candidate eats babies."

Listen, you won't learn ANYthing from debates except that all politics sucks. Don't bother. The ultimate goal is for you to like one of the candidates more than the other, and you can get that from sound bites. I mean in the last two elections we (probably) chose the most likeable guy running and look where it got us!

If you insist on watching a staged, prescripted, disingenuous event with voting, may I suggest AMERICAN IDOL instead?

Where's MY 40 Acres and a Mule?

African Americans tend to vote Democratic, a demographic factoid which is puzzling to Lt. Colonel Frances Rice (Ret.) of the Lincoln Heritage Institute. She has published an Open Letter to the Democratic Party demanding that they apologize for their roles in the repression of African Americans over the years. Check out some of this!

Whereas the Democratic Party has never apologized for their horrific atrocities and racist practices committed against African Americans during the past two hundred years, nor for the residual impact that those atrocities and practices and current soft bigotry of low expectations are having on us today,

Whereas the Democratic Party fought to expand slavery and, after the Civil War, established Jim Crow Laws, Black Codes and other repressive legislation that were designed to disenfranchise African Americans,

Whereas the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party, and their primary goal was to intimidate and terrorize African American voters, Republicans who moved South to protect African Americans and any other whites who supported them...

Yikes! And without doing any of the research myself, I expect that she's right. First of all, about asking for an apology. We can afford to apologize, because we stopped acting that way (with the possible exception of Sen. Robert Byrd) around the mid-sixties. We could admit the mistakes, point out the good works we've done since, and pry away the remaining 45 Black Republicans.

Nowadays, white Republicans are in almost utter denial that there's any racial problem in America. They're furious that we're still running affirmative action programs, they're enraged that African Americans percieve that they're still being kept down. How dare they! While we Democrats are falling over ourselves to be good to the people that America kidnapped and made to build our nation, Republicans nowadays have decided that we have done enough and it's time for those ingrates to stop whining and climb the corporate ladder. Which will be easy because nowadays, there isn't any racism.

The white Republicans were pretty good to African Americans for a hundred years or so there, from a little before Lincoln to a little before Nixon. Then it seemed to turn around. That's when they started saying, "Why is that guy getting breaks I'm not getting? Why should I have to have some kind of artificial barrier to prevent me from competing fairly, while another guy HAS to be considered because of the color of his skin?" The answer, of course, is that it's a corrective to unconcious racism, but they keep saying there isn't any such thing.

Look, I'm sorry you guys aren't getting the credit you deserve for your century of progress. Seriously. But voters can't re-elect Lincoln. I'm not black, but if I were I'd be considering what you've done for me LATELY when casting my ballot. And as a white guy who doesn't want to be surrounded by dissatisfied African Americans, I'm sticking with the Democrats, guilty and backpedaling as nobly as they can.

Learning the Lessons of the Cold War

Here's a scary thought.

I was having my usual argument about the efficacy of the war in Iraq. My opponent argued that being there somehow prevents attacks on our own soil. Even if that were true I said it's a 3 trillion dollar insurance policy against a couple million dollars damage.

But you know what? If you're a terrorist that's a great strategy! By funneling more and more of our assets into Iraq, we're devoting less to public services and infrastructure. You remember when we had fewer national guard troops and equipment for the aftermath of Katrina? That was the terrorists hitting a major American city. The weak economy? Terrorists striking a blow.

Sure it puts the terrorists all the way up into the coveted evil-genius Fu Manchu class, but they're not all stupid. In fact if they're not smart enough to see this plan themselves, they're hardly a threat. Even if we dismantle our own government without them being in on it the effect is the same.

We won the cold war without a middle missle being fired. It was enough to force the communists to spend more on missles than they could afford. Its possible that our enemies will accomplish the same spending pennies to our dollars.

They Might Be Giants Writes Exxon Slogan

I heard on the news today that the rising price of deisel gasoline is hurting students. Since the busses have to run, schools are taking the money out of books and pencils and teachers salaries.

Exxon - "We Don't Want the World; We Just Want Your Half."

My, That George Bush Fellah is Evil

So this morning Bush announced that he was going to both withdraw the surge by summer AND reduce the time soldiers are out in the field back to 12 months, both on the advice of the commanders in... I dunno, sub-chief? He also announced that he will hold the line on any further withdrawals until Petreus and company can evaluate the situation caused by the first set of withdrawals.

Interestingly, NPR's hourly newscast is emphasizing the last point, that Bush is refusing to consider further withdrawls at present. Could be liberal bias, could be that they consider that the real news since we knew he was going to say the other stuff.

Bush also whined about the next emergency war funding bill, saying that unless Congress met his conditions for it he would veto it. I think that when Bush whines about stuff, he really believes it. It's when he's not whining that he's lying. The whining is his way of saying, "you idiots! Why are you fighting me on this? I'm right!" I gotta admire a man who so doesn't accept compromise that he's willing to underfund his own war in order to get his way. There's your rejection of nuance!

By the way, how is this an emergency? Were they planning on the war being over when they did the regular budget?

I think Bush made a good point about the need to keep troops in until we have defeated the terrorists. If we withdraw, they will be emboldened. But if we don't and we don't "defeat" them, they will also be emboldened. And the terrorist aren't likely to throw in the towel any time soon, because they're terrorists.

And how did poor Iraq get in this situation, with us taking over their country to lure terrorists away from our own soil and thus fight them there? Isn't that the worst possible foreign relations move? I'm deliberately ignoring the point in the narrative where we claimed to be invading Iraq because they were harboring the 9/11 attackers. Because they stopped saying that for a long time and only recently started saying it again.

It was amusing to hear the President say that 15 months ago we were on the defensive... I don't recollect that kind of assessment coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania 15 months ago. As I recall, victory was just around the corner back then. Well, the corner must be pretty damn vast.

======================================

Almost forgot my most important point! Why is Bush willing to draw down the troops? That's not like him!

Well, maybe even he recognizes that if he doesn't want to be the one to start up the draft again, he's going to need to get his Iran invasion force from somewhere. He's got till the end of the year to crank up THAT machine, and from the speech I'm guessing it's going to be sooner rather than later. Maybe that's the emergency which will postpone elections. Still too early to tell. I'm keeping some money on a bird flu epidemic.

Quit Whining About Liberal Media Bias!

I'll steal some numbers from Glen Greenwald, because they speak for themselves.

In the past two weeks, the following events transpired. A Department of Justice memo, authored by John Yoo, was released which authorized torture and presidential lawbreaking. It was revealed that the Bush administration declared the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights to be inapplicable to "domestic military operations" within the U.S. The U.S. Attorney General appears to have fabricated a key event leading to the 9/11 attacks and made patently false statements about surveillance laws and related lawsuits. Barack Obama went bowling in Pennsylvania and had a low score.
Here are the number of times, according to NEXIS, that various topics have been mentioned in the media over the past thirty days:"Yoo and torture" - 102
"Mukasey and 9/11" -- 73
"Yoo and Fourth Amendment" -- 16
"Obama and bowling" -- 1,043
"Obama and Wright" -- More than 3,000 (too many to be counted)
"Obama and patriotism" - 1,607
"Clinton and Lewinsky" -- 1,079

I'm begging, BEGGING, Warner Todd Huston to explain how this proves the media has a liberal bias. I know you can do it, Warner!

My Life As A Trendspotter

When I wrote that thing about the right wing's weird support of any issue that helps the oil companies, even I didn't see this coming. 

"the story will center around all our favorite Muppets producing a show to raise money to save their old theater. They need the money, of course, because an 'evil character' is trying to buy the building so that he might tear it down to "get at the oil underneath." Why is it we have to turn everything into an anti-capitalism, anti-oil hatefest?"

Warner also helpfully supplies addresses, so you can write to Jim Henson co and, I guess, demand that the Muppets let the capitalist drill. What he's failing to understand is that, as sponges-rubber based puppets, the Muppets would inevitably absorb oil spills. And have you ever tried to clean oil out of a sponge? They'd never be the same again.

By the way, if you think I'm anti-capitalist, here's the deal with stories of this kind: The Muppets are raising money to RETAIN PROPERTY THEY ALREADY HAVE. The oil company is trying to take advantage of a perceived weakness. To support the oil company in this story is to support the practice of big Oil stealing the property of hard-working Americans for their own profits. Of course, legitimately they could be fighting eviction by OSHA because that theatre is in pretty bad shape. I bet those stairs are unsafe.

They Shot The Wad On Clinton

Before I start let me both apologize for and elicit applause for the abominable headline. Hey, I'm a blogger - you've seen worse. If I don't sicken and offend you at least once in a while, I might as well be writing for CNN.

Barack Obama is in a fascinating position right now, because it seems that everything is conspiring to get him elected President of the United States. Let's look at historical trending first. With the president's approval rating at constant lows, with the economy doing not so well, the usual drumbeat for "change" is louder than it's been in a long time. Visually, Barack Obama represents change more than the other candidates. (You know what I mean. Don't pretend you don't.) Plus, he neither is promising to extend an unpopular war for the next hundred years, nor is he the wife of someone who held the office for the sleaziest eight years in recent memory.

Next, his opponents. There has been an historical blunder committed by the usually skilled Republicans, and it is gonna cost 'em. For a long time now, they have assumed that Hillary Clinton was going to be the Democratic nominee. I mean a long time, like a couple of months after they pretended George Bush was elected. *rimshot* So for seven years now, they've been demonizing Hillary Clinton. She swindled her Whitewater investors, she killed Vince Foster, she's the antichrist, she has an annoying laugh. They can produce volumes of rumors at the drop of a hat proving that Hillary Clinton flew the planes that hit the World Trade Center towers. Really. Ask a Republican some time.

It's a well-oiled machine, it's been running like a juggernaut for a long time, and it's worked! Unhappily, too soon. It's supposed to be kicking into high gear now that Hillary is the presumptive Democratic nominee, but she isn't. They made her such a monster that America turned to the good-lookin' tabula rasa instead. Hillary! as she's known among the wingnuts for reasons I've never had fully explained, is taking on water fast.

So now, the Republicans are scrambling to find ways to demonize Obama, and they just don't have the research. They've tried insinuating that he's Saddam Hussein, they've tried claiming that people who vote for him are hypnotized (oh, that's an effective way to swing voters - tell them they're stupid) and lately they're demonizing his pastor, because everyone knows you blindly believe everything your pastor tells you.  Not everyone does; just the black folk. Uh oh.

The race thing is a real minefield for Republicans, who have to avoid the one easy arrow in the quiver: If you elect Obama, he'll give the country to the darkies! So they're stumbling. And because their attacks have been so week, Obama looks even better than Hillary by comparison. 

Meanwhile, Hillary has been spoiling for a fight for eight years herself. She's armed herself to the rhetorical teeth. The only way she knows how to campaign is to fight dirty, which would have been great if she were against McCain, but she's using it against our own guy. Instead, as a result, she looks strident and overambitious and prepared to bring down the party to feed her lust for power. Thus Obama is the only un-scary candidate, and after a constant desert of orange alerts and shoe-bombers, the country badly wants to feel un-scared right now. Obama is our national oasis.

A change in strategy from either Clinton or the entire right-wing machine could put Obama in a worse position, but I don't think anyone is capable of correcting their course at this stage. Obama has been criticized for being vague and for saying little. Can you blame him? Every time someone else opens their mouth, he looks better and better. He is the jujitsu candidate, using the force of his opponent's blows to topple them.

NRG - Norquist Regales GOP

I was at a dinner party last night, and a friend of mine said she was taken with this story about right-leaning politicians fighting for our right to choose - light bulbs. How odd that this would become an issue to tear our congress people away from the war on terror, or the struggle to prevent gay marriage, abortion, and Arabs! 

Indeed, energy issues are a fascinating extremist litmus test for the Republicans. Their argument against CFC bulbs, for example, is that they contain mercury and therefore are bad for the environment. When have you ever heard a Republican passionately defending the environment against a manufacturer such as General Electric?  By the way, a typical thermometer has ten times the mercury, so where's the horror at their use?

Almost all scientists agree that there is a global warming problem caused by man's use of fossil fuels, but the wingnuts (term of endearment, boys) believe the handful of contrarians who happen to work for the fossil fuel companies. Dick Cheney takes office, has a mysterious summit with, oh, no one that you'd be interested in, and emerges with our nations energy policy: quit wasting so much money on R&D and use more coal and oil. 

The right wing's position, as I read it, is "We must waste as much energy as possible to stay competitive." Which is arguably a valid position. 

IF YOU WORK FOR AN OIL COMPANY.

For the rest of us, it means taking money we'd be saving by using wind power and solar power, and giving it to Big Energy instead. They'll remain competitive, we'll all suffer. Already one of the chief causes of inflation is the price of transporting everything, because the cost of gas keeps crawling up. Sometimes it leaps.

And once in a while when I'm venturing onto right wing blogs, I'll complain about how these tax cuts are hurting the country, and they'll respond "we need to cut social programs." When I suggest that maybe we could also stand to eliminate some tax breaks to Exxon and company because they're achieving record profits, my right wing friends turn strangely silent. Perhaps they don't have the energy to speak.

So here's my theory. Grover Norquist, the creepy old guy in that smoke filled room in New York where the X-Files old men used to hang out, is getting his money from the Oil Companies. In turn, he's encouraging pro-big-energy opinion around the offices of Fox and NewsMax, which filters down to my favorite right wing blogs. They write their pro-coal-industry editorials, then set down a piece about how the unions and the trial lawyers control the left. What do you think?

Please, PLEASE Don't Think Different

News that strikes at the very core of my being - Karl Rove loves his iPhone. Burbles the K-man:

I mean it is just shocking how much better, how much more productive I am. I no longer carry around a giant address book, if I don’t have my calendar close at hand, I can quickly check it out of my– I don’t have to carry, I used to carry several notecards, now it’s just as easy to scribble on my little notepad, I can take photographs and forward them on immediately, it’s just remarkable.

You understand, he could use a Blackberry for all that stuff, or a Palm Centro, but the weasel insists on shouldering into my turf. Come to think of it, even I don't have a damn iPhone!

Look Republicans, superior technology, like science itself, is the provence of Democrats and Libertarians. You have to use Windows-based gadgets. Its just how the divide falls. Did you know that Steve Jobs is a vegan AND a buddhist? You know what was featured prominently in the early ads for the iPhone?

A front page of THE NEW YORK TIMES.

Rove might as well be puttin' Cindy Sheehan up in his guest room.

Tell you what, if that guy tries to link to my MySpace page, I am NOT approving.

Bring Back the Steam-Bulb!

These are scary times. Once in a while you long for something familiar and old-time, even if its ridiculous and senseless. I was thus comforted to learn today that Congresswoman Michelle Bachman has introduced a bill to Counteract a provision in last winter's energy bill. The provision mandated the phasing out of wastful incandescent bulbs over the next 25 years; Bachman is fighting for our right to choose the crummy old bulb.

It fills me with nostalgia. Not incandescent bulbs; they suck. But to see Republicans rallying around some crazy-ass technology and screaming against progress, that's a welcome return to form. These are the people who fought shoe laces because it would put button-hook factories out of business, and it's great to have 'em back.

I think, however, that bringing back torture and the Crusades may be taking a good thing too far.