Coolest. Data Center. Ever.

Can your data center withstand a hydrogen bomb? This one can.

GOP VP Kwestionere

Click to enlarge.

Wuuuutever, Dude

P.J. O'Rourke laments about how conservatives blew it. In the end though, I'm not exactly sure what he is trying to say. I guess it's that he wanted conservative government more than liberal government, but conservative politicians were too shitty at their jobs to ever make conservative government a reality--or at least a sustainable one.

The piece is mostly ornamented with cliched, metaphor shtick--as is most everything he writes--so don't expect to do much learnin' (liberals are tofu-eating, sandal-wearing, tree-hugging dimwits who don't know how the real world works, blah, blah, blah). But it makes me wonder if he's asked himself the very hard question of, "was I, maybe....wrong?"

Since 1959, under Republican Presidents, the US has, on average:

• Higher deficits
  
• Higher national debt
• Higher federal spending
• Higher unemployment

Don't believe me? Look at the Economic Report to the President and Michael Kinsley's article on it.

The numbers are far from earth-shattering in their difference, and some could well argue that it is all a coincidence. But if one is prepared to make the coincidental argument, one better be prepared to say that Presidents don't matter for an economy and that Democratic presidents sure have a way of being lucky. And surely the numbers prove that Ds don't spend as much as the GOPs (we can afford our own tofu and chai lattes).

So why support these buffoons? Beats me--that's why I voted against them--but I suspect it can come down to cultural issues. Maybe you do want to deny gay people the right to marry and keep Terry Schiavo alive by federal governmental fiat and take away Habeus Corpus and track private citizen's phone calls and strike out on Utopian wars and mortgage your children's economic future by banging a tamborine and holding out a tin cup to China--all at the expense of your own income--just enough to support the present day GOP, the "real" America. But you don't, P.J., you don't.

You said it yourself:

And where would you rather eat? At a Vietnamese restaurant? Or in the Ayn Rand Café? Hey, waiter, are the burgers any good? Atlas shrugged.

Socially, you are more with the Ds in wanting a more open, diverse society. Economically, most of America does better under the Ds. I assume you want rule of law and things like torture and secret imprisonment of people ended, given your professed love of liberty. So you are conservative why?

Maybe you are just a dude, an Independent like me. And maybe, just maybe, you've been wrong for the last ten years or so. Possible?

Keynesian Economics on its Head (and Acid)

My brother forwards me an article about section 382 of the tax code and how its unilateral repeal by our Treasury Department is going to be a multi-billion windfall for US banks--perhaps as much as $140 billion.

It looks almost certain to be illegal:

"Did the Treasury Department have the authority to do this? I think almost every tax expert would agree that the answer is no," said George K. Yin, the former chief of staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the nonpartisan congressional authority on taxes. "They basically repealed a 22-year-old law that Congress passed as a backdoor way of providing aid to banks."

But the Treasury Department doesn't think so, of course:

Andrew C. DeSouza, a Treasury spokesman, said the administration had the legal authority to issue the notice as part of its power to interpret the tax code and provide legal guidance to companies. He described the Sept. 30 notice, which allows some banks to keep more money by lowering their taxes, as a way to help financial institutions during a time of economic crisis. "This is part of our overall effort to provide relief," he said.

The Treasury itself did not estimate how much the tax change would cost, DeSouza said.

The Bush Administration is not known for rigid compliance with law, nor competency, so this comes as no great surprise. But it continues to amaze me how many supposedly conservative economists and politicians absolutely prostitute themselves for big business. Actually, it's not even prostitution--that's at least a business relationship. It's more like a star-gazed groupie blowing the bass player on the bus. And it's done sincerely:

Some conservative economists argue that not only should a firm be able to use losses to offset gains, but that in a year when a company only loses money, it should be entitled to a cash refund from the government.

Now that's brilliant. Create an economy that makes it impossible to fail if the bank gets big enough. How is that not national socialism--and terribly misdirected national socialism at that? Privatizing profits and socializing losses is "conservative?" And how is this not wealth distribution on a grand scale?

I don't know near enough to speak to section 382 of the tax code. Perhaps there is an argument to be made that it is somehow unfair. But I don't think that this, along with decades of Republican measures, can be interpreted as anything but a sincere belief that government needs to be active in helping big business make more money--even at the cost of small business and everyday citizens--because that is what fuels the American economy, in their view.

That is an argument to make, and some may find it a good one, but what it most certainly is not is an argument for laissez faire, free market capitalism. It is more of a sloppy De Gaulle approach to economics where government subsidizes anyone in the Russel 2000--preferably the Fortune 100--and uses the tax revenue from average citizens to do it.

Meet the Emanuel's

From this article, I think I like them...from a distance.

End of Chris Tucker?

Let's hope so--at least in his normal form. I always thought he was an unfunny dipshit that appealed to the lowest common denominator for attempts at humor, but looking at this now, I can only repel. He is not an unfunny dipshit now. Just pathetic.

Chris, that shit never really was funny. Now, given what has happened, it's just stupid.

Charles Alexander

I saw this weeks ago and didn't post it for whatever reason, but I can't help it now, no matter how Pollyannish it might look. And I can only hope I'm close to half as engaging and charming as Charles when I'm an old codger (if I ever make it that long).

Sanctimonious

What is it with modern Country music and the odious sanctimonious bullshit associated with it? I just got done listening to some cliche shit-can tune about the "Red, White, and Blue" and how we (the US) will "put a boot in your ass."

I've heard similar Country tunes and it makes me cringe. Not because I'm not a fan of my country or of putting a boot in the ass of our enemies, but because it's so stupid and childish. If you want to talk about being tough, be tough. Talk of throwing your enemies before you and delighting in the sound of the lamentation of their women. And if you want to talk about love of your country, do it in more ways than saying "soldier, beer, USA, Jesus, or Smokey Mountains."

I don't know why it makes me cringe on the level that it does, but it does. I suppose it's the same kind of cringe that one gets if their drunk parent is making an ass of herself--just plain embarrassment, really. Does that make me an elitist snob? No, I don't think so. I just hope for more from my fellow citizens. And seeing how the sweatsuit-and-Bud Light-combo woman that is subjecting me to this mind numbing drivel is having trouble figuring out how to use the phukin jukebox, I don't see why I should not hope for more--and certainly don't see why I should not be embarassed.

GOP Civil War Watch

Yet another article about the oncoming GOP civil war, though a pretty decent one. My favorite part:

This election ought to once and for all teach conservatives that Ronald Reagan is dead, and he's not coming back.

But before the D's and liberals get too excited, they don't exactly have a coherent philosophy either. If you asked me now what the Democrats stand for, I couldn't really tell you. It doesn't seem that tough to do either, which makes it even more curious. How about something like:

1. Support for American working families through fair taxation, universally available and affordable health care, and a world-class educational system.
2. Strong military, but restraint in foreign affairs--focusing on diplomacy, and using our military only when absolutely necessary.
3. Fierce defense of our Constitution and the Civil Liberties it guarantees.
4. Commitment to a robust infrastructure in all 50 states.
5. Commitment to a cleaner, safer United States through massive reduction in pollution and forming a Green Economy.

That's just jingoism I came up with off the top of my head and, honestly, numbers 2, 3, and 4 used to be known as Republican stances however long ago. But if the GOP is going to give them to you, take them! And, hopefully, the GOP will try to take them back--we could use a good debate.

But whatever form the D platform takes, it needs to form quickly. If I'm honest with myself, I voted for Obama more because he is anti-current-day GOP platform vs. a D. The GOP has become a victim of its success and needs to rebuild, but it will rebuild. If the D's want to stay formidable, they need to become more of a party to vote for vs. a party of protest.

Reading Kristol

I can't help but think that Bill Kristol is a bright guy, but his columns seems so....unthoughtful. I have no idea what he is trying to say with this one, really. It's a little tongue-in-cheek, I'm sure (though only funny to him), but is that the best he can do? From the article--speaking of how he was somewhat optimistic of the GOP's near-term future but was then watching Obama's acceptance speech:

Obama told his daughters, “And you have earned the new puppy that’s coming with us to the new White House.”

I gulped.

Not out of my deep affection for dogs, fond of them though I am. But because while we’ve all known that Obama is a very skillful politician, he hasn’t until now been a particularly empathetic one. Competence plus warmth is a pretty potent combination.

Maybe this partially explains his early lobbying for Sarah Palin as VP choice. I think he truly views American politics as a pseudo-American Idol competition which, cynically, it partially is, but there is more to it than that.

Then again, I really have no idea what he is ultimately trying to say. And I sometimes wonder if he ultimately knows what he believes in.

Future Energy Sources?

Promising signs for geothermal, and a new form factor for nuclear power.

Wooten

I don't always like the finger tapping stuff and I'm not the biggest fan of the stuff he does with Bela Fleck, but how could I possibly deny that he is a phenomenal bass player. He just does things that many people didn't think was possible--or couldn't even imagine in the first place.

Caribou Barbie

Remember that this is Fox News reporting it. Governor Palin didn't know the three countries in NAFTA (all three of them) and thought that Africa was a country instead of a continent. I don't know which is dumber, though I have to lean toward 'Africa is a country' as dumbest. That's the kind of shit Jay Leno pokes fun of on his "Jay Walking" segments when he talks to clueless bimbos on the street (male and female bimbos, I should say).

Bill Maher was right. She's a BIMBO. A BIMBO.

But We Still Hate Homo's

As the United States elected its first Black candidate, it repudiated equality in marriage. Proposition 8 in California has passed. Proposition 102 in my state of Arizona has passed. Both propose to disallow gay marriage by state constitutional ammendment. And, with quite painful irony, Proposition 8 was given a huge boost of support from the African-American vote in California. Andrew Sullivan laments here. His co-Atlantic blogger, Ta-Nehisi, has his back here.

So bigotry is not gone from our country by any stretch, my dear readers. And bigotry can exist in the hearts and minds of those who have been victims of bigotry themselves (see: Hispanic rejection of Obama in the Democratic primaries, Chinese-Americans who won't acknowledge my presence in their shops when in San Francisco's Chinatown, Puerto Ricans that talk shit about Mexicans and vice-versa, White Northerners that immediately think "idiot" when they hear a White Southern accent, etc., etc.).

But this issue of bigotry seems especially cruel. Homosexuals aren't asking for anything other than the chance to be part of a family. That's it--only to allow them to pick a person they fall in love with and bring them into their family while being part of their loved one's family as well. Marriage is the only vehicle to do this. And to deny this to homosexuals who are otherwise law-abiding, tax-paying adult citizens--while affording any law-abiding, tax-paying heterosexual adult citizen the right--can only be explained by bigotry, not law or reason. It is discrimination. Period. And both California and Arizona should be ashamed of themselves.

The Onion Strikes Again

Yet another brilliant article.

"The election of our first African-American president truly shows how far we've come as a nation," said NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams. "Just eight years ago, this moment would have been unthinkable. But finally we, as a country, have joined together, realized we've reached rock bottom, and for the first time voted for a candidate based on his policies rather than the color of his skin."

"Today Americans have grudgingly taken a giant leap forward," Williams continued. "And all it took was severe economic downturn, a bloody and unjust war in Iraq, terrorist attacks on lower Manhattan, nearly 2,000 deaths in New Orleans, and more than three centuries of frequently violent racial turmoil."

Fringe Right Schadenfreude

How delightful is this?

Imagine Reality as a planet. Then imagine its solar system. Then imagine the universe that solar system finds itself in. Then go somewhere to the right of that universe. This is the space they inhabit.

I am so happy to see them in soul-wrenching turmoil. I truly am. Does that make me mean or petty? Perhaps so. Do I feel the slightest bit sorry for it? Heh heh heh heh....NO.

And one final word to you lunatics: KISS MY RED, WHITE, AND BLUE ASS! USA! USA! USA!

And Still They Come

I'm trying not to be too Polyannish about this, but this election has damn near got me emotional. Every article, blog snippet, video, and news story I come across says the same thing: the turnout is huge. Reports from all over the country are saying that they have never seen voter turnout like today's and--keep in mind--40 million people have already voted.

In states like New York, Massachusetts, California--states that have been put in Obama's win column for months now by all the polls and pundits--are seeing lines of voters unlike any they have seen before. And in states like Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Wyoming--states that have been firmly McCain's for months--are seeing the same thing.

There is something tectonic going on in American politics right now. And I firmly believe that Obama has led nothing short of a movement--possibly even a revolution. The American political Left has been organizing and leading grass-roots initiatives for years now and Obama owes them quite a bit, no doubt. But Obama has forever changed the American political and cultural landscape.

We will be reassessing just who we are for decades to come after this election. Questions and policies regarding ethnicity, economic fairness, the role of government, war and peace, what makes one liberal or conservative, what is...possible--all will all be revisited and redefined.

And still the voters come. People that have never voted before. People that have felt bullied, disenfranchised, inferior, intimidated, and many who have just been apathetic in the past, are now voting, now making phone calls, now driving people to polling places, now taking part in writing their own future, now feeling pride, now believing, now knowing hope. What a great day to be an American.

I Voted

Not only was I able to vote, but I was treated to this poem once I got back in the car and turned on the radio (written by the great American writer, Walt Whitman):

If I should need to name, O Western World, your powerfulest scene and show,

'Twould not be you, Niagara - nor you, ye limitless prairies - nor your huge rifts of canyons, Colorado,

Nor you, Yosemite - nor Yellowstone, with all its spasmic geyserloops ascending to the skies, appearing and disappearing,

Nor Oregon's white cones - nor Huron's belt of mighty lakes - nor Mississippi's stream:

This seething hemisphere's humanity, as now, I'd name - the still small voice vibrating -America's choosing day,

(The heart of it not in the chosen - the act itself the main, the quadrennial choosing,)

The stretch of North and South arous'd - sea-board and inland - Texas to Maine - the Prairie States - Vermont, Virginia, California,

The final ballot-shower from East to West - the paradox and conflict,

The countless snow-flakes falling - (a swordless conflict,

Yet more than all Rome's wars of old, or modern Napoleon's): the peaceful choice of all,

Or good or ill humanity - welcoming the darker odds, the dross:

- Foams and ferments the wine? it serves to purify - while the heart pants, life glows:

These stormy gusts and winds waft precious ships,

Swell'd Washington's, Jefferson's, Lincoln's sails.

Today is a good day.

Prescience of the Onion

The Onion, per norm, is positively brilliant in this article from January of 2001. We will have to see how accurate this one is.

Andrew's Case

His last--and hopefully best--case is made here.

I agree with most of it, but do not have the industry or talent to match it. Certainly not with words, anyway. And though my take is a slight bit more negative than his in proclaiming my endorsement and future vote for Obama, I will say the following: I am tired of being ashamed.

I am ashamed by the fact that we torture. That Americans, serving in an official American capacity, have tortured people--many of them innocent by the Pentagon's own admission. Some, tortured to death. Yes, innocent people--tortured to death. By Americans.

I am ashamed that we can't deal with our nation's successes and accomplishments--left to us by our generations past--and continue to fail again and again by managing wars without competance, economies without reason, and politics without respect.

I am ashamed that my president for the last 8 years has viewed the Constitution of the United States as an obstacle vs. something that he needs to protect (as is mandated by his Oath of Office, btw).

I am ashamed that my conservative friends can sit with my liberal friends and, within minutes, all of us come to levels agreement that show a way forward through the most contentious issues in this country such as abortion, the death penalty, economic equality, etc., but my goverment cannot.

I am ashamed of having a President who is rightfully mocked, rebuffed, and disrespected. Of our loss of respect in the world, our dreadful economic situation, of having people like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell playing an influential role in our politics. I am ashamed of it all, but I will never be ashamed to call myself an American.

And that is what Andrew and I share mostly. A desire to be believers in America again. A desire to be proud of ourselves again. And that's why I am voting for Barack Obama.

Brubeck's A-Train

Not one of the best performances I've heard from Mr. Brubeck, but certainly one of the most interesting. It's overlong and a little self-indulgent, but it seemed like he was trying to do something new--even as popular as he was at the time. I can certainly respect that.

Though a Duke tune (actually, a Billy Strayhorn tune, technically) it seems done more in the style of Thelonious Monk. But what do I know? So, here it is:

RIP Studs Terkel

Studs Terkel, one of the good guys, dies at 96.

Taxes and Socialism

A milder anti-progressive tax column here. I understand it to a point and, in all honesty, I am for a flat tax rate if the first X number of dollars can be exempted. I don't know what that number should be because I'm just an opinionated ass and not a policy wonk, but I'm thinking somewhere around the 25 to 35 thousand mark. In addition to that, I would want to see a consumption tax in the single digits--closer to 5 than 9--that primarily benefits the welfare state. In that way, we would have progressive taxation by effect rather than design.

I really don't understand fully the angst behind Obama raising the tax rate 3-4% on dollars made over 250K, however. I really don't. I certainly understand not wanting to give my money to idiots in Washington (or even brilliant scholars in Washington)--that's easy. But it is not that that seems to fuel the anger. It is more the very phrase of "share the wealth" that seems to gnaw at these guys. As a conservative friend of mine calls it, "giving my money to people who haven't deserved it."

1. People who make 6-figures, effectively, get a tax break already by not having to pay Social Security taxes above the 90,000 mark (it's actually probably a bit higher than that now--not sure). They can keep 7.65% more of their income to invest and spend however they please on those dollars.

2. 95%+ of what the government does with taxes is a redistribution of wealth. The money goes to highways you never drive on, universities you never attend, weapons you never fire, retirees you don't know, national parks you never visit, etc. Governments have been doing it ever since we've had governments and taxation.

3. A concentration of wealth makes for a less robust economy (see: TODAY's economy with over half the wealth being controlled by 5% of the population). Coddling the investment classs in the hopes of effective trickle-down economics does not, and has not worked.

4. It's a 3 or 4 percent increase! The same rates we had during the very prosperous Clinton years! Get over it! We have to pay the bills somehow and, if the revenues don't come from the largest pool of income in the US, then from where?

There are more points I could make, but I'm so tired of this. President Bush and his giggling gaggle of GOP sycophants put an extra 5 trillion dollars onto the debt just in his term in office. That's approximately $16.5 thousand for every man, woman, and child in the US--obviously more for every taxpayer. And that is just the debt. It is time for adults to run the government now and fix his sorry mess and, if that means raising taxes a few percentage points on the most comfortable in our society, than that's what it means.

It is far from socialism. It is acting like a grown-up.

Polls

Pollster's latest is here. I'm always skeptical of polls, but they can be useful indicators. If they are right, we could be about to witness a landslide for Obama. Georgia is now a toss-up state and McCain only enjoys a 6% lead in Arizona.

It shouldn't be too surprising though. As I said back in June (well before this economic collapse), the task presented to McCain is so difficult, I don't know if any Republican could have won this year.

Helen

There is very little in this world I love more than a sassy old broad telling it like it is. Two of them is even better. Drop by Margaret and Helen's place if you get a chance. Helen has a pretty good missive on Palin.

Kinsley Makes the D Economic Case

My dad has often said "I always lose my job when Republicans are in power" (he is in construction). Now there are a few numbers to back up his suspicion that the Ds are better at running the economy.

Wooing Conservatives

Andrew Sullivan publishes a top-10 list of why conservatives should vote for the D. Pretty good, but I have no idea how convincing it would be on a per-voter basis (and I doubt he does either). What I appreciate most about it, however, is that he places the war on terror as #1. There is an argument to be made about a different approach to foreign policy from the Left. And, I would suspect, it will initially be a nasty debate within the Left itself--and then a more of an ideological one with the Right, as it should be.

There is fodder in the above paragraph for a number of books and policy debates, but I won't continue any longer--I've been cheating from work and personal obligations too long as it is to be writing this. But for what it's worth, a video of Republicans and Independents making their arguements better than I ever could:

IQ Litmus Test

This is....amazing. And this woman is dumber is than a sack of hammers (below).



Point 1: Obama is talking about putting the highest tax bracket back to 39%, as it was during the Clinton administration (note how Clinton's economy didn't exactly destroy American prosperity). That means the tax rate going from 36% to 39%--a 3% increase in taxes on dollars made over the 250K mark. If anyone out there is making over 250K and are aghast at a 3% increase on that slice of your income, I have three words for you: Boo Frickin Hoo. We've been bleeding our budgets red and Obama is raising taxes because he must. Why? Because of that irresponsible child masquerading as a President in the White House. If you have a problem with that--blame W and his merry band of hypocrites that ran the House and the Senate for the first six years of W's presidency and, together, spent other people's money like a pack of drunken sorority girls with new credit cards. It's because of them that we have to go around the world with a tin cup and a tamborine just just to pay the massive bills we've collected.

Point 2: If progressive taxation makes one a Socialist or akin to Marxism, then lump Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan in that crowd as well.

Point 3: Eh....what's the use? Crazy broads like this will be pushed to the margins soon enough, I guess. They will still have similar private thoughts--but they will either keep them to themselves so they aren't socially ostracized or will be put out to pasture. It won't be soon enough.

UPDATE: According to Paul Abrams, Obama would increase the top marginal rate 4%, not 3%. His overall view on it is here. (What he and I neglected to mention--and where Joe the Plumber shows his ass as someone who knows little about business or taxes--is that if he incorporated his company, as he should, he could pay himself a salary of 249,999 dollars and never face a tax increase under Obama's plan).

In the Genes?

Temper, temper...

Joe McCain, brother of John McCain, called 911 to complain about traffic. I'm serious. When the 911 operator asked him if he is calling to complain about traffic, his response was, "F*&k you." Could the McCain campaign get any more bad news?

And, short of being mentally handicapped, can you imagine anyone besides a self-righteous and self-absorbed prick calling 911 because he is frustrated with traffic? What could possibly be going through his head? I know he is no spring chicken, but I do think that the car radio was invented prior to his birth. Why not turn it on and listen to some music or, say....find an AM station with traffic reports on them...?

From the Pathetic to the Lugubrious

Apparently, Joe the Plumber's $40K/yr salary is still a trifle short of buying the plumbing company he wants and, instead, he is considering running for office.

Good news for Joe if he wins, Congressman don't make over $250k/yr either--so no worries about Obama taxing you more.

The Vet Who Did Not Vet

Pretty impressive and, appropriately, in the style of Dr. Seuss.

Another New Reader?

You may not believe it, but it's true. A reader stumbled upon my post regarding Hillarah and my self-absorbed mood of saying how I have long thought her a terrible choice for VP. The reader did not dissect the post, and I thank him/her for that. I didn't like it while I was typing it, and don't like it now, because the subject matter (at least for me) is too complex for a single post. It's full of holes and question marks but--given the constraints of a blog and my inefficiency with words--I had to punt and let it be where it was.

Anyway, the reader sent a couple links I thought I would share about "Generation Jones." It's new to me and I'm a bit skeptical about it, quite frankly. I understand the point, but I don't want to get too caught up in dissecting the electorate. There is a tendency, as with all efforts to classify human beings, to use social classifications as denominators in a algebraic equation when doing so. That was not the reader's point by any means (and I'm not suggesting that it was), but it can lead to mistakes in judgement if one isn't careful.

With the overlong disclaimer, however, I still do think this is a generational shift between baby boomers and those that are not--Generation Jones or otherwise. There is no way we can compete with the boomers on the "interesting" level. The 60s were too complex and transformative to compete with. But I don't think that's a bad thing. It makes us less self-absorbed, more open to shades of grey, more...pragmatic, really.

In that way, it puts us more in the modern human, and certainly more American, tradition. Kinda boring? Yes. Self-righteous? Thankfully no. Correct? Perhaps. But willing to talk about things without absolutes or some grand agenda fueling the discussion. Long live that which is Boring, I say (at least in politics ;-)).

So, without further ado, my reader's contributions here, and in the video below.

How Cool is This?

Yet another rip-off from Andrew Sullivan (please read his blog). This picture fit the cliche of being worth 1000 words--at least to me. Obama's comment to the photographer: he had already had them re-soled once at the start of the campaign.

As Long as I'm Feeling Self-Righteous...

Why not set myself up for a massive foot-in-the-mouth moment? I wrote a couple months ago that Hillarah was a terrible choice for VP. Actually, I said it a few times before then as well--likely more than a few times.

The 3 or 4 people that read this thing thought that I was over the top in my antipathy for Hillarah, and to a point I was, but it was motivated by a frustration with Ds (or at least non-current-day GOPs) to settle for what was 'winnable' vs. what was more bold and far better.

Obama has literally, quite literally, mobilized millions in his campaign effort. The vast majority of these volunteers do very small things such as make a few phone calls, plant signs, drive a couple people to early polling locations--nothing earth shattering. But the obvious brilliant simplicity of it is that it makes the election their election too. They have a personal stake in the outcome and--in a real way--effect the final tally beyond their single vote. It is enpowering. And, at the risk of sounding too Polyannish, it is the modern manifestation of Thomas Paine's dream and hope for the United States.

That is not to say that McCain's campaign doesn't do the same thing for its volunteers or that Hillarah wouldn't have. But can anyone imagine either of them doing it as well? Further, can anyone imagine the slime oozing out of the McCain campaign ads if Hillarah was the VP choice? With that much baggage?

Back to the intended point, this always had the chance to be a generational shift. I've said before that Obama's biggest qualification is that he is not from the Baby-Boomer generation. There are two generations younger than them that need a voice and a new politics. And it is those two generations that are really propelling Obama into the White House, rightly or wrongly. Hillarah represents neither of these two generations. That is not her fault (and it is Obama's luck), but that doesn't change the reality.

While true that Biden is not of Obama's generation, he doesn't obfuscate the platform in the way that Hillarah would have. And he gives the opposition little to oppose other than honest policy disagreements.

Even if, by some miracle, McCain wins this thing, it will be Obama's style, Obama's constituency, and Obama's campaign tactics that will guide the Ds in the presidential races in the future. It will not be Hillarah's. And that, in my humble opinion, is not only a very good thing, but a greater legacy than Hillarah could have ever left.

Ahem

So uhhh, told you so. Though I may well have underestimated him. Obama may be on his way to a landslide.

Two quotes of note from the article:

...[T]he pollsters are finding that some voters whom they considered "unlikely" voters have in fact turned out to vote. Zogby gives Obama a 21-point lead nationwide among people who have already voted, and SurveyUSA and Civitas peg his advantage among early voters in North Carolina at around 20 and 30 points, respectively.

And:

And according to Tom Jensen, Obama has a 68-24 lead among voters who did not cast a ballot in 2004.

Holy Shiznickels.

Lil' O'Reily

Not too far off...

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

Colin Powell Endorses Obama

In case you haven't heard. Powell's endorsement won't really effect the election so much, I don't think. If he was out giving speeches for him, sure, but he's not going to do that.

What I think it might help accelerate, however, is a GOP reality-check. They seem to be the only thing in more disarray than the economy. When you lose the confidence of people like Warren Buffet, George Will, Peggy Noonan, and Chris Buckley, you have a problem. When you lose a man who is a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a former National Security Advisor, and a former Secretary of State--all of them under Republican presidents--you have a major problem.

Just Who is McCain?

The video below is the John McCain I miss--along with many, many Americans, I would imagine. (The part II of the video is here). Very funny, very decent, and very human. Obama did a good job as well, but wasn't near as funny (video here and here).

Here is what I didn't know about McCain. Make no mistake, the article is out to get him and show his warts. I understand that. But the article reminds me of friends and acquaintances that I have had, and still do have--people of great qualities, but not the type I would want as my leader.

Assuming that McCain is about to lose this election (certainly not guaranteed, but likely), I hope he makes more news like the video below rather than continuing on with the behavior and language he has exhibited in this nasty and divisive campaign. It seems like his worst qualities are showing now and, not to be morbid, he isn't going to be on this earth much longer. I would think he would rather be remembered as a great public servant than as a petty opportunist who--even in his 70s--never stopped being a bratty frat boy.

Ugly II

Andrew Sullivan finds this gem:



As Andrew points out, this is "On the official Republican website in the state capitol of the most populous state in the Union." Elevated campaign, indeed.

Ugly

A sampling of GOP supporters in PN below. It is a small sample, obviously, and hardly scientific. But it's still ugly--as in very ugly--and, no matter the defense, I haven't heard similar ugliness from the other side.

Land and Taxes

I've been watching this global economic panic like most everyone else and certainly have no answers, but I'm wondering who is vindicated in all of this? Paul Krugman, the recent Nobel Prize winner? Ron Paul, the Congressman who ran for President of the US and constantly harped on strict finance? Alexander Hamilton, who wanted a national bank? John Kenneth Galbraith, who advocated wage and price controls along with more government involvement with the market?

I have no idea. I'm sure there are many economists and pundits out there either feeling vindicated or who are now running for cover. But I can't help thinking that--in his own way--Henry George is the one most vindicated, however posthumously. Though notable for a few things, he is most remembered for his advocacy of a single tax on land--arguing that land and natural resources should belong to the public good.

It is Land, Real Estate, that was really behind this latest crisis. Before there can be sharply rising home prices, lax lending practices, defaulted mortgages, bankrupted mortgage insurance firms, or any of the things that have gone wrong, there needs to be land and the need for shelter. And it is land that governments have still not really figured out, I think. Land is certainly taxed all around the world in different ways, but I'm not sure what the best way to do it is. And I don't think many do.

Ideally, Henry George would have the dirt itself be as close to a zero-profit market as possible due to taxes taking away any increase in price. So, if one buys a plot of land for $1 million dollars and sells it for $2 million later, the $1 million increase in value would be taxed at 100%. Here is where it gets tricky, however. If one spends $1 million building something on the land and sells that building for $2 million, the $1 million increase in value for the building is not taxed at 100%. George would not have it taxed at all, in fact--just the dirt.

From what I understand, Philadelphia (and other cities in Pennsylvania) has a system something like this, where the land and the structure are taxed at different rates. No idea how well it works, but I imagine it has it's detractors. Hong Kong is known for steep land taxes so they can keep income taxes low. Even Winston Churchill favored a Land Value Tax early in his career. There are plenty of other schemes as well, of course (look here, if interested).

What I hope is that present-day economists look less at the details of government regulation, lending practices, interest rates, etc., and instead look at land tax policy again. Land is an expense to everyone from the richest to the poorest, inflating the price of everything from lease space, warehouses, factories, apartments, homes, movie theaters--anything with a structure on it--which, of course raises the prices of all goods and services. Hyper-inflated real estate prices sunk Japan into a decade-log recession back in the 90s and a mortgage crisis has caused a global financial crisis today.

I don't know how to handle it best (or really how to handle it all, truthfully--not a well trained economist). But I can't help but think that Real Estate is the last vestige of feudalism and, therefore, the hardest to deal with in a market economy. It has nothing to do with capitalism. Construction and development have everything to do with capitalism, however, and it seems quite difficult to separate the two in tax policy or overall land value. But I think it has to be done somehow.

If it can be pulled off, perhaps income and sales taxes could be lowered for everyone. Perhaps more affordable housing could result (requiring a 30-year mortgage for a modest home seems to be a failure of modern capitalism, truthfully), perhaps lower prices for goods and services could result. I really don't know. But at least it would make our supposed capitalist market economy much closer to that--a capitalist economy. As it is now, we are--quite literally--paying for our continued failure to effectively deal with the most basic of human needs: earth and shelter.

Most ironic of all, it is Real Estate--the most non-capitalistic element of our sainted market, capitalist economy--that is compelling capitalists around the world to forgo market principles and behave like socialists now. What I would give to bring Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and Henry George back from the dead to see where we are at now. Criticism would come from each of them, I'm quite sure. And we would probably deserve it.

Wish I had a Dog

Dogs saying hi to a soldier returning after 14 months. Enjoy:

Racial Stereotypes

Oh so sumptuous... The irony lifts the palate to new heights of ecstasy .

Leave Sarah Alone!

Delicious. The McCain camp wants to call "no fairzeez" if Gwen Ifill asks too many foreign policy questions.

Note to McCain camp: Your candidate is running on foreign policy! Nothing Else! His economic agenda is the GOP/Bush agenda but with cutting pork barrel spending (has anyone actually seen a barrel of pork, by the way? Just curious. Seems like an odd cliche is all.)

There is nothing else there. The chief argument for the GOP--and it is a serious one--is that McCain is more suited to lead the US through these turbulent times given the terrorist threat. The End. In fact, he is betting so heavily on it that he dismisses the economic side of things almost entirely. (Does anyone seriously believe that "Bush/GOP economic agenda, but a shade stingier," will actually be persuasive given the economic conditions we face presently)?

Given all that, how can the McCain camp--even for a second--try to protect their VP choice from being inexperienced and/or unknowledgeable about foreign policy? This would be a joke if it wasn't so serious. Instead, it's a sham. An utterly absurd, and insulting, sham.

Oh, John. Tell Me Again How Much You Love Me

Doh! Them pesky facts again!

"You were wrong"

I thought this was Obama's best moment. Calmly, cooly, taking what McCain had to dish out and then throwing it right back at him. It looked to make McCain absolutely squirm.

Daddy Issues

Irony just seems too puny a word for this one.

RIP Paul Newman

Clive has a good little story about him here.

Contrast

And plugging the CNN blog-line further, there is this blurb about Biden's tax returns and how he is comparatively poor amongst Senators. I don't really care about that, but I do like this nugget:

A McCain aide told CNN Friday the campaign would release Palin's documents, but on their "own timeframe."

Lovely. First, they keep her holed up in Alaska to avoid the press (saying that she will talk to the press when the campaign is ready), and now they are going to release tax documents "on their own timeframe." And Obama is the elitist? "Rest, ye peasants! The Court of McCain will hear your questions upon His Majesty's convenience." Charming.

What are they so afraid of? Oh, that's right, her apparently complete lack of knowledge regarding foreign policy--to include the Bush Doctrine. Do I think she is stupid? Of course not. But I don't think she has much interest or curiosity on the subject. Certainly not enough to know about the very doctrine that put us into Iraq, anyway--which is rather important, I should argue, since she is running to be, you know, the next in line for President of the United States and stuff.

And I wonder what else she might have no knowledge or opinion about like, say...the trade deficit, budget deficit, national debt, plummeting dollar, inflation on food and energy, Sino-Indian relations, nuclear arms in N Korea and Pakistan, Burmese unrest (call it "Mee-an-mar" and I'll kick you in the face), immigration, the political/security situation in Mexico, unfunded liabilities, anything. ANYTHING! Just give me an opinion. Show me that the thought at least crossed your mind. I don't have to agree, just know that you have an opinion. And please show me one before you were nominated, not the rehersed party line.

But, of course, I'm an elitist because I do things like...read, and have a small amount of knowledge about the world around me. And here is the scary part. The McCain campaign has taken a cynical--and potentially winning--bet. That Americans really are that dumb. That they expect, and react well to, patronage. That talking about pick-up trucks and football and Jesus is enough to win.

Maybe their calculation is correct, but their premise is wrong--I'm convinced. Sure, many don't give a hoot in hell about Burma, but I bet they would if they were told what the situation was. They may not really know the impacts of massive trade deficits, but they could know them in about 5-10 minutes and would certainly have an opinion about the subject thereafter. And many of them actually do read and keep up on things. And therein lies the challenge for Obama.

He's great about getting people filled with the religion of reform and change and happy days, but I should think his real challenge is to go to blue-collar America and tell them what the GOP's cynical bet really is. Tell them that the GOP thinks you are stupid. That if a candidate talks about something other than pickup trucks and God and 5-point bucks in the woods, he's an elitist. And then challenge them to ask questions from both sides that would expose just how versed they are on the subjects. Show them that they are not simpletons with no interest in anything 5 minutes past their noses. That they can, and do, care about a number of things. And, most importantly, that they want to have a leader that challenges them to do so vs. a Kindergarten teacher telling them how proud they are of us for being 'regular Americans' (whatever that means).

Biden is actually better suited for that. But Obama might be able to pull it off too. Guess we'll see.

Goddammit!

If McCain doesn't rescind/apologize for this add, we've had it. This is Rovian politics at it's purest, unfiltered level of bullshit. Actually, Rove is more clever--I take it back. This is just an outright lie. Yes, a lie. Obama and McCain voted identically on immigration reform (including a vote to stop a Republican-led filibuster) and yet the McCain campaign plans to air the ad anyway.

"Truth? Fuck it! So long as you win." That has been the last 8 years--where elections are the only moment of accountability, integrity is for chumps, and political success is measured by how well one can dupe the public. I just can't believe that McCain--champion of electoral reform!--is a part of it now.

Kim Jong is Ill

Looks like Lil' Kim might have suffered a stroke (get it? Kim Jong Il, Kim Jong is Ill....... nevermind). No idea what this might mean in that he might be back on his feet in a few weeks or he might be a puppet turnip for 10 years. Who knows? But his speedy death and pain is wished for heartily by your faithful blogger.

Even Sadder

So much has been said about the qualifications of Palin as the VP pick that the attempt to add further would be beyond unnecessary. Truth be told, I don't care about Palin. What I care about most is why McCain and his GOP advisers even considered her seriously. It was an idiotic, impulsive, cynical choice.

As such, it begs the question of just how seriously McCain and the GOP are about governing. Seriously. Are elections the only standard? However one views the election, frivolous or pedestrian are two adjectives not commonly thrown at it. Particularly given the last 8 years of 'winging it' with W, the GOP needed to show--above all else--that it was serious about governing again. This VP choice just re-enforces the argument that the GOP is, literally, not fit to govern.

A party that was once known for tolerance, fierce protection of privacy and civil liverties, and a dedication to laisse-faire markets and society is now the party of intolerance, torture, and a disgustingly self-righteous claim to proper society to mask their paucity of ideas to fit the world as we live in it now. And leading it is my Senator and one of my heros, John McCain.

His submission to the GOP as it is now is such a betrayal of Goldwater and the traditions of the GOP as to invoke nothing but heartbreak--truly. He knows better, but had to win an election and thought that this was the best way to do it.

So go ahead with Palin, Senator McCain. Appease the Christianists and betray Goldwater, agree that torture is ok if we do it, continue with the fantsay that there are quadrillions of barrels of oil off the US coastlines, continue with the fantsay that lower taxes always equals greater US prosperity. All you must give in return is my vote, my respect, and your soul.

I'm in

And I ask for your support. Join the ranks of this revolutionary campaign.

Interlude

Juan García Esquivel, King of Mexican Lounge Music, takes on Blue Danube with Kubrick as a visual background.



(Hat Tip: Clive Davis)

TSA Today

Bruce Schneier remains ever watchful of our glorious TSA. My favorite one of the many:

The third-grader has been on the watch list since he was 5 years old. Asked whether he is a terrorist, he said, "I don't know."

Though he doesn't even know what a terrorist is, he is embarrassed that trips to the airport cause a ruckus, said his mother, Denise Robinson.

[...]

Denise Robinson says she tells the skycaps her son is on the list, tips heavily and is given boarding passes. And booking her son as "J. Pierce Robinson" also has let the family bypass the watch list hassle.

The old "tip the skycaps well" ruse...clever girl, Ms. Robinson.

Onion Digs Deeper into Voting Demographics

As usual, the Onion digs deeper--this time into America's demographics. Finally, a news agency is tracking 'dental assistants who are going to go back to school to get their real estate licenses someday' demographic! One slight word of criticism, however. There is no mention of left-handed Haitian lesbian tennis players--crucial in Florida.

Bill Schneider, aka Baron Nozzle de la Douche, would be proud. Dig this joke at the end. (Overthrow of Greece...where does he come up with this stuff)?!


Latest Poll Reveals 430 New Demographics That Will Decide Election

Wealthy Mexicans Chipping Themselves

I knew kidnapping was an enormous problem in Mexico, but wow! The wealthier Mexicans are now getting chipped in the same way people do with their pets in the case of abduction.

I know it's a hell of a lot easier to say than do, but I cannot believe that Mexicans aren't taking to the streets in protest over police involvement with kidnappings. In the US and many other countries, people would be ready to burn down government buildings if it were found that police officers were involved in such a heinous crime as kidnapping. Yes, heinous. I would want to kill someone that killed a family member of mine, if I'm honest with myself--seems like a normal reaction. Anyone involved with kidnapping a family member of mine I would want to slaughter. And, continuing to be honest with myself, I would do it with no more compunction than stepping on a cockroach--possibly less.

Mexicans have a history of revolution. They will fight if you piss them off enough. I just wonder why they aren't angrier now. And, back to the chips, what happens if/when you can find an abducted loved one with this method? Do you go to the police?

Hillarah as VP

I don't know this Nate Silver guy much, though his site is always impressively up to date with polling data and the electoral map. But he thinks Hillarah is a wise choice, as do many, many people. I think it would be a disaster for a myriad of reasons that I won't get into now since I've done it so much in the past, but those that argue the "Hillarah for Veep" line seem to be looking at the election only. The guy will have a job to do after he wins office and Hillarah makes that exponentially more difficult.

Yes, you have have to win the office before you can govern, but my God...unless Obama gets caught with a dead girl or a live boy, it's over. He will be the next President.

Finally, if douche bag extraordinaire Bill Schneider agrees, time to reconsider. He is the very symbol of lemming political opinion in the media today. Can any of you remember an original thought or comment he has ever uttered? Even something remotely interesting?

Hillarah ain't gonna make it, Gents. Time to say goodbye.

Biden as VP

The press turned up its Jr. High gossiping to a fever pitch as they await Obama's pick for VP (feels only a microdegree away schoolgirls talking about who Johnny is going to ask to the prom but...it's their life, I suppose--should be excited).

My surprise has been the conventional wisdom that Biden is the "surprising" or "dark horse" choice. To me, he is almost the obvious choice and have said as much back in January (sigh, could have made a fortune on intrade). That's not to say that Biden has received the nod, but I just can't see much of a downside other than that he probably doesn't want it--at least comparative to a Secretary of State slot or still a ranking member of the Senate.

He's strong on defense, knows the Senate as well as anyone, has bipartisan respect, isn't afraid to scrap, good on camera, nationally known, in good with the Clintons, great family, doesn't dodge questions, moderate...why not? Yes, he can shoot his mouth off a bit, can be a little smug, had the plagiarism thing about 20 years ago, but outside of that...hard to beat if you ask me. Guess we'll see.

Whoever it is--and it will NOT be goddammed Hillarah, trust me--I hope s/he and Obama can help put the Clintons out to pasture as part of the election. We've suffered enough.

Monterey Redux--part 1 of possibly many

I don't know where to begin except chronologically. So, away we go:

1) Wednesday. Arrive in San Jose. Airport sux schweaty monkey nutz, but you live with it (and they are working on it).

2) Arrive in hotel in Santa Cruz (no hotels under $300/night available in Monterey area during the Historic races and Concours D'Elegance).

3) Go have chipotle prawns and scallops on the pier. Santa Cruz is a nice place to be. Dinner at Pasatiempo resort up the street a ways. Great burger while watching the Olympics.

4) Thursday. Off to Pacific Grove Municipal Golf Course--aka 'The Poor Man's Pebble.' Breakfast at Coastie's in Pacific Grove, Brother and I play with a charming older twosome (Mitch and Kitty--just friends, not a couple) and I played like a Casa del Fuego on the back nine (the coastal nine). 1 over on the back--with 3 missed birdie putts within 10 feet--and shot a +5 75 for the round. Hurts because it could have been better, but still could have been a lot worse. What a place.

5) Lunch at Gianni's--great pizza/sandwich joint in Monterey. Two pints of Carmel Wheat, mmmmmmm--great beer if you can get it ( a lot like Samuel Adams Summer Ale).

6) Shoot pool at Easy Street Billiards on Tyler Street in Monterey. I kicked my brother's tucas at 8-ball and then he kicked mine at 9-ball. He owns a pool table though, so overall, I won.

7) Drinks on the patio of Spanish Bay resort. Got a free shot of Laphroig 15 year whiskey. Missed the piper (whimper), but I'll see him next time.

8) Friday. Played Seascape Golf Course in Aptos. Kicked my ass. Kicked the bejeezus out my brother. We probably did about 2 grand in property damage the first nine holes. The second nine was better (less homes) and more dramatic. I recommend golfers play it if they think they can keep it pretty close to straight. Otherwise, pick a different course. It gives the term 'tree-lined' an an entirely different meaning and, if you ever have an even lie, you will know you are on one of the better tee boxes.

9) Nappy time back at the hotel. Mmmmmmmmm.

10) Rally in Carmel. According to my brother, rather boring compared to last year. Still, pretty damn cool. When seeing yet another Ferrari inspires a "huh, not bad," you are at least close to Carmel. Some amazing cars were parked all over the joint--including a 1930 Rolls Royce and (right behind it) a 1959 Bentley. We even saw a chain driven fire truck looking thing from 1918 with inlaid wood on the rear carriage parked behind a 1932 Packard (pics delivered later).

11) Dinner in Carmel at La Dolce Vita. Great setting. Good, but not great, food. Nicest waiter in the world. Excellent sauce on their calamari--I'll give them that for certain.

12) Saturday. Drive down Highway 1 a bit to Rocky Point Restaurant (see pic below). There was a funer....wedding going on at the time, but they made room for us. Food was better than I remembered it. Watched ground squirrels forage for food as the waves crashed against the rocks about 100 feet or so below--all glass walls in this place.

13) Off to the historic races! Imagine every exotic race car you've ever fantasized about seeing and then magnify it by at least 10 if you are a true afficianado--100 if you a pedestrian fan like me. The place is dripping in racing nostalgia. Two cars were taken out of the museum because it was time to race--including a 1978 Lotus and a 1959 Ferrari Testarosa. The winner of the whenever-1933 bracket was a 1932 Alfa Romeo--one of 5 left in the world with the 'original' stamp on it--and he drove it like he stole it. Oh, and the 1978 Lotus was driven by Mario Andriette.

14) Dinner a Chef Lee's in Monterey. Went a bit budget with this one. Service was awful, but food was good for the price.

15) Sunday. Breakfast at Friar Tuck's in Carmel. Wasn't really hungry, but food was good. Setting better.

16) On to the Concours D'Elegance--the premiere car show in the world. Forget what you might think you know about car shows. This show takes all day to see and a lifetime to drink in. Unless you happen to have seen $1.25 million dollar one-of-a-kind cars from 1929 next to the single Pinafiori Cadillac in the world (made in homage to Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy in 1961) as but a teaser to the real car show, don't try to compare notes with me. Have you ever seen a 1959 Stingray Corvette? The answer should be "no" because it was a concept car in 1959 that never saw production. But it's at the Concours. How about an 1894 Mercedes Benz...ever seen one? I have. Oh, and the setting is the 18th fairway of Pebble Beach! My brother and I were joking that they must have the greenskeeper chained to a bed in a remote part of Southeast Asia. Pebble Beach! The 18th hole! With ancient cars driving on it?! I would need black tar heroin to calm me down if I were the greenskeeper.

So, all in all, not a bad way to spend 4 or 5 days. I recommend it to any who can afford it--budget style or otherwise. And whoever is responsible for that blessed place, be it God, the Dark Lord of Hades, Thor, Quetzalcoatl, Zues, E=mc2, or Colonel Sanders...thank you. You have my undying devotion.

Monterey--Post Mordem

Just got back from My Beloved, and it hurts. There are many, many places on this earth I would rather not be than my hometown of Phoenix, but coming back here from Monterey, California almost feels like leaving 'that perfect woman' to come home to the wife (and the life) that you have vs. the one you truly want--heartbreaking, bittersweet and, above all, so longing for what could be.

I offer a picture of a breakfast setting my brother and I had at Rocky Point Restaurant along Highway 1. I ordered the first bloody mary because I like bloody mary's. I ordered the second because I knew I would have to leave soon. Fortunately, like the place itself, it didn't disappoint. May I present: The Lone Bloody Mary Cypress.

Obama in Trouble

The Onion uncovers a long held secret.

Adjust your bookmarks

Orwell as blogger starting 9 August. (His diary entries will be submitted in the form of posts).

A Trifle Uptight

Seriously. What is this guy's problem?

Poulos took a beating, and rightfully so, in the comments section of his earlier post regarding Obama's statement of being "...a proud citizen of the United states, and a fellow citizen of the world." He took initial attempts at defense by writing:

"My great scorn for Obama’s remark — even if it was lifted from Kennedy, or if it’s supposed to apply to all of us, the content of my objection stands — should not be confused with scorn for his appearance in Berlin or even his speech. It is undeniable that Obama is an incredible asset to what is often discussed as ‘America’s image abroad’, and should really just be described as America. In several important ways, Obama is full of crap, but it is our crap that he is full of, and people all over the planet still love it."

"...great scorn..." and "...full of crap..."?

Now, instead of just saying something to the effect of "fine, let's move on," he goes off on a self-absorbed and bizarre tangent about liberty and supposedly European absurdities of pan-human brotherhood and the greatest absurdities of the human condition and...whatever, Dude. Deep breath, Poulos, deep breath. Calm down.

To take the 5 word phrase of "...fellow citizen of the world..." in a near 30 minute speech and then extrapolate it into a rambling diatribe about our supposed delusions of pan-human brotherhood and the Left's menacing ambition of world government is not only terrifically pedantic and petty--it is childish, dishonest, and, quite frankly, unhinged. Further, it makes one wonder if he even listened to the speech!

Global warming and pollution just so happens to be global. International terrorism is called international terrorism because--you guessed it--it's international. World trade involves the world. Similarly, 'World markets' imply 'the World.' As such, logic would seem to indicate that Obama is quite right in saying we can't deal with these issues alone.

Then there is the fascinating irony in Poulos being so apoplectic about Obama's phrase and about how he is full of "America's crap" of human solidarity. A universal yearning for freedom and liberty is exactly the reason America was founded. It is Man's commonality and it does bind us together. This idea, this 'European delusion,' is the very foundation of the country!

Poulos may want to disagree with that, but he will be disagreeing with the language of the Declaration of Independence and every single administration since the founding of the nation. The continued existence and success of the United States, after absorbing almost every language, ethnicity, and culture on the planet however, would seem to indicate that Obama just might be on to something. If America has shown the world anything of value, it is that we are not so terribly different and that, yes, there is something that can universally bind. It doesn't make us brothers and sisters, but it does make us human beings that can, normally, coexist peacefully. And that's plenty good enough for me.

Days with my Father

So uh...., whew.

Just view this. Please.

Obama Does Berlin

And did it well (embedded below). How can McCain possibly beat this guy? Patrick Appel (guest blogging for Andrew Sullivan) has a round-up of blog reviews here.

Beyond the addition of yet another outstanding speech, however, is the fascination I have with the bitter reaction of some conservatives to it, and the cynicism others have even to the idea of him giving a speech in Berlin now.

I can perfectly understand disagreeing with Obama on any and all political points, but what could possibly be wrong with an American presidential candidate being respected, and even adored, by a European audience? How could it be a mistake to say "I am a proud citizen of the United States and a citizen of the world" (the 'citizen of the world' phrase used by both Presidents Bush and Reagan, btw)? What could possibly be so regrettable about *finally* having a President--after all these horrible 8 years--who is greeted with cheers vs. protests and venom and derision and mockery? Talk about "Change We Can Believe In!"

Have some conservatives become so twisted around that they honestly think being liked around the world is some sort of stain or cause for concern? That it will somehow turn off American voters? Sad, if true. But I very sincerely doubt that many Americans who are still on the fence or were leaning toward Obama watched this and said something to the effect of "Gosh, he did have my support, but now that he seems to be respected and liked in Europe I'm not so sure anymore. If only he was a lightning rod of worldwide animosity and mockery. Then he would have my vote for sure."

To someone who would never vote for Obama anyway, sure, this speech might not have done him any favors. But if anyone has looked more presidential than he did, commanding the attention of over 200,000 Berliners while giving yet another stellar speech (fully from memory from what I could tell), I would like to know how I seemed to have missed the last 30 years of my life.

I don't think these conservatives hate Obama, but I think they hate how good he is and--perhaps--hate even more the idea of having to accept Obama and a left-of-center government in the US for a long time to come. It looks as if the GOP will be in the minority for quite a few years now and, for them, that has to hurt.

Nozzle Rage

Kinda scary, actually...

JibJab

They got a new one, and it's perty darn fine methinks:

Don't Mess With China

These guys look pretty serious (or at least photogenic in drills). I especially like guys on the automatic walkers with mini guns. If I had a dollar for every time that stopped a crisis!

Actually....come to think of it, I don't think that would do much good. But here's to theater!

The Brass Ring

So I got a shot at a gig that pays big money for me to do cool stuff from home and--for the most part--make my own hours. It's not mine yet by any stretch, but things look good so far.

If I have a point in this post at all though, it's only to say that because of my field (IT Security) there are a range of well-paying opportunities available to me that just aren't there for most--even very well trained and/or educated people. Further, this job (as with all my previous jobs) really does nothing in the way of adding value to the economy in that it's service-oriented.

One gets the feeling sometimes that to really get the high-paying jobs, one needs to get into the service industry (and I don't mean just restaurants and hotels). We don't seem to value production and building in the same way we used to and I don't know why. But it worries me a bit. I think that one of the best things our new president could do would be to massively invest in the infrastructure of the US. It's bi-partisan, it's good for the economy, we need it, and it could re-establish jobs that actually add value to the economy as good, interesting, and rewarding occupations. Having to become a doctor, lawyer, broker, or IT weenie can't be the only way to make big bucks and have a rewarding career.

The downside of San Francisco

More than one douchebag abounds--though this glorious specimen is from Toronto, for the record.


http://view.break.com/527579 - Watch more free videos

Class

Jesse Jackson displays a slight lack of decorum (and/or a glimpse into his ego maniacal self). By the way, isn't it quite lovely how the old guard--left and right, black and white, seem to despise Obama? I can't help but think that it's for the oldest of reasons--they covet him. Well, that combined with frustration. He just doesn't fit a mold they've trained so hard to detect, and that whirring in their head is the sound of marginalization.

$250 a barrel

Remember that this is a dirty Russian scumbag talking, but he's a very powerful Russian scumbag.

The chief executive of the world's largest energy company [Alexey Miller] has issued the most dire warning yet about the soaring the price of oil, predicting that it will hit $250 per barrel "in the foreseeable future".

If You Have to Have Anal Cancer..

May as well make a few bucks out of the deal. You're so brave, Farrah! (I think I just vurped).

Reasons to Vote Republican

They make quite a sales pitch...

US Immigration Policy

I try not to be frustrated and angry, but then I read things like this. Gonzaga wants to recruit a shooting guard from Canada, but...

Kong, 20, is originally from Sudan, which is listed by the United States as a state sponsor of terrorism. Although he has lived in Canada since age 7, he does not hold citizenship there. He has been denied a visa to study in the United States three times, and it is unclear if he will ever satisfy the requirements for entry.

Even if the State Department thinks it's possible for a 7 year old child to fake being a refugee in order to hatch his mastermind terrorist plot--which is a bit of a stretch, I should hope--does his behavior over the last 13 years count for nothing?

I don't think the State Department is keeping him out because they think he's a terrorist. Even the drooling, giggling beasts at the INS aren't *that* stupid. I'm sure the young man is being turned down because some part of the process can't be fulfilled the way it normally is and it would put them in a position of having to rub a couple synapses together to work through. So they just reject the request and go put more coffee in their sippie cups because, well...fuck him--plenty of others standing in line.

Substantial reform of the State Department (and especially the INS and immigration law, since I mentioned it) would be enough to make a Obama a "good" president in my eyes. The task has to be daunting, at best.

Oh Johnny

Johnny Mac looks like a Jr. High Dorkus Aerileus up there. I knew he was a pretty lousy speech-maker, but this was just painful to watch and listen to.

You're giving a speech, Senator, not reading a limerick. And even if you were, it's not funny. And even if it was funny, your delivery makes it fall flat. McCain needs to stick with town halls and debates--this speech making just isn't for him and, at his age, he ain't gonna learn how to do it quickly enough.

Tommy Emmanuel

He's, uh....perty good.

Relax, Ds. Relax

So much fretting about whether Obama can win...please. Forget about Dick Morris, Karl Rove, and Ohio. Who phukin cares about them?

As an armchair pundit, it's easy to see Obama winning the following states:

WA

OR

CA

CO

NM

KS

MO

SD

MN

WI

IL

LA

MS

SC

NC

NY

VT

ME

CT MA

RI

NJ

NH

IA

DC

MD HA

That puts him at 286 electoral votes--16 over the 270 level necessary to win. McCain will probably have these states lined up:

MT

WY

ID

UT

NE

AL

TX

KY

WV

AZ

OK

That puts him at 93 electoral votes--177 shy of the necessary majority. Which, of course, means he would *have* to win Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Arkansas, North Dakota, Tennessee, Michigan, Indiana, Georgia, Alaska, *and* Nevada *and* steal a few states from Obama just to win a razor thin majority of electoral votes. All Obama has to do is win over a state or two (or not) and walk into the Oval Office.

It's not that Obama could not lose, but the task presented McCain is so overwhelming, I don't think the best GOP candidate on her best day could pull it off.