One Of Us

I don't have cable nor do I watch television.  Instead I live through the screen on which I type.  I can faintly hear it whispering "you're one of us, one of us, one of us..."  Yeah.  Apparently I am.  I'm waiting for the Terminator prophecy to come true, and when it does, Skynet will have all of my shit because I do live my life through this.

Back on topic.

Since I don't watch television, I have not seen the "Black in America" series on CNN hosted by Soledad O'Brien.  Somebody asked me if I was watching it and I echoed my mother's sentiment -- I'm Black in America everyday, so...

The person who asked me seemed surprised that Soledad O'Brien was Black.  I knew she was from her first appearance on television because of her nappy edges.  But this person was truly taken aback.  "She doesn't look Black," the person said.

I sighed.

Ta-Nehisi Coates, expressed his feeling that any show that attempts to broadly categorize ("The Black Man," "The Black Woman and Family") a whole race is destined to fail.  Having also not seen the show, I'm reticent to kick in, but I get the point.  I am cocking my head as to why it's not "The Black Man and Family."  But again, I haven't seen it.

Racialicious has an excellent post picked up from The Black Snob about Ms. O'Brien.  The post references a message board on One Drop Rule (different from One Drop on Too Sense).

Self-identity is a personal thing, but apparently some folks are upset because they see Ms. O'Brien self-identifying in a convenient manner.  They feel she claims to be Black when it suits her and Irish when it suits her, Hispanic when it suits her and Multi-ethnic when it suits her.

To which I reply...

Yeah.  And?

No! No! I'm Here. I'm Here.

Anonymous Nephew, who I guilted into reading me every day, lamented my lack of daily posting, particularly since I bullied him so shamelessly.

I'm still having computer issues.  Well, actually router issues.  For some reason, my wireless router at its whim kicks me off the internet; at highly inappropriate times, I might add.  I've spent hours, at least 9, on the phone with Malaysian techies trying to figure out what the frak is wrong with it.  I even bought a new router that, after 4 hours of the techie taking me through every conceivable end around, is apparently dysfunctional.  I got still another router, but have to wait until the weekend to hook it up because if it doesn't work right away, more phone hours with exotic places.

Here's what was cute.  When my techie told me he was going to call back when he started his shift again, he said he'd call at 9:00 a.m.  I asked if that was Eastern or Pacific time.  He got this kind of cute whine and said "It's American time!"  Cute.  And can I mention I was kind of ashamed of how imperialistic I felt at his frustrated answer.  But I copped to it and we laughed.  We did a lot of laughing.

In the meantime, while my router is working for just RIGHT NOW, I can bring up the fact that the winsome Maureen Dowd has two articles in the NYT that indicate that on the European trip with Sen. Obama, she had normal human conversations with him.  And he's kind of laughing and teasing with her.  Okay.  I'm monumentally jealous.  Doesn't he know she's writing stupid things about him?  I hate her.

Also, something to ponder that I want to write about more extensively...perhaps with an argument and everything just like real bloggers.

After it has been made apparent to anyone with eyes that Obama is wildly popular with the rest of the world, what would happen to international relations if this country elects McCain and proves its majority rule dedication to hubristic isolationist arrogance?

One Drop at Too Sense has a great essay entitled "How Long Will It Take for Obama to 'Fail' as President?"  I agree.  I believe if Obama is elected, he's going to get savaged.

Okay.  I should take advantage of the fact that I am still connected to the internets and post.  I'll try to get something up post haste.

I Write Letters

I don't just glurg up stuff here, y'all.  I also write letters to online newspapers when I read op-eds that put a bee in my bonnet.

In today's LA Times op-ed, John R. Bolton gave his Ming the Merciless criticism of Sen. Obama's speech in Berlin.  Yeah, that John Bolton, the U.N. hater who said:

There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States.

So, with my bee firmly in my bonnet, I write to the LA Times:

Well, of course, Robert R. Bolton would bristle at Sen. Obama’s Berlin speech setting forth the concept of a world coalition. He and his PNAC colleagues have stated for all to know that they hold no quarter for any country, or indeed any of the US citizenry, unless it is in the service of US aggressive isolationist superiority.

In his criticism of Sen. Obama’s speech, he states:

“That he picked a foreign audience is perhaps not surprising, because they could be expected to welcome a less-assertive American view of its role in the world, at least at first glance. Even anti-American Europeans, however, are likely to regret a United States that sees itself as just one more nation in a ‘united’ world.”

This statement is also what is so patriotically maddening about Mr. Bolton and his ilk. This country by dint of its size, population, culture, spirit, technical and human resources could never be “just one more nation.” We are not now nor will we ever be a shrinking violet. Devising a worldwide interconnected policy for dealing with the problems that plague us all is not the weakness Mr. Bolton believes it to be, nor is it naïve. It is what is necessary when the policy of bludgeoning the world does not work.

For your information and something I didn't know until a friend sent to me the below-referenced publication, The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), was a neoconservative think tank, which counts as directors or signatories (in addition to Bolton), Fox News blood-monger William Kristol, Dick "I Sneer Even When I Smile" Cheney, Donald "Army We Got" Rumsfeld, Charles "My Boyfriend" Krauthammer, and I. Lewis "Already Has A Ludicrous Nickname" Libby.  Quite a cabal.

In September of 2000, the PNAC published a white paper entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses:  Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century."  It is a 90 page how-to for building up the military for world domination based on the premise that the U.S. has vanquished communism and now has a responsibility to, well, dominate, as well as protect U.S. "interests" (read "oil") in the Gulf.  And oh, destroy Saddam Hussein; that too.  I would like to link to it so you could read it for yourself, but the PNAC site where it was housed, has been taken offline.  I am too cynical to believe that the Skull and Bones-esque organization has come to an end.

For the record, I believe that a strong military is never a bad thing, if only that it helps guarantee that it will never be used.  Walking softly carrying a big stick is a viable policy in my view.

The money quote from the September 2000 paper:

Further, the process of [military] transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

And just a year later...

The PNAC undoubtedly is old news to those who pay closer than the scant attention I have paid to politics in the past.  Of course I knew that President Bush and his administration were less than honorable, but just how dedicated to their proposition they were comes to me sadly; both for my ignorance and their venality.

Evil-doers indeed.

What Gaineth a Man?

In response to Sen. McCain's attack ads criticizing Sen. Obama for not visiting the troops wounded in Iraq and Afganistan, Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor responded:

John McCain is an honorable man who is running an increasingly dishonorable campaign. Senator McCain knows full well that Senator Obama strongly supports and honors our troops, which is what makes this attack so disingenuous.

If in this campaign McCain would rise to whatever character it took to survive while he was held prisoner-of-war (a feat worthy of respect and honor but really has nothing to do with running a country) I believe he might sleep better at night.  That ad is pretty reprehensible for someone who vowed to run a respectful campaign.  And it's a shame whomever is driving doesn't think McCain can win without it.

Also?  Kind of brilliant on the part of the Obama campaign.  They've taken the man out of the machine both complimenting and scolding.

UPDATE:  Chuck Hagel agrees with me that this ad is below McCain.

Them That's Not Shall Lose

Hello, out there.  I've had computer issues, so posting is light in comparison to last weekend's flurry.  Since the computer was dysfunctional, I am so far behind reading what's out there in the world of traveling and non-traveling candidates.

Gee.  Lots of people to see him in Germany.  See.  Wasn't it not too long ago Sen. McCain was criticizing Sen.  Obama for not having the foreign policy cred and that he hadn't been to the Middle East in a dog's age?  I think this falls squarely in the category of be careful how you challenge a man who can, you know, step up.

I'm of the mind that Obama is not particularly afraid of anything.  Not McCain.  Not Bush.  Not Cheney.  Not the GOP.  The advantage of not having a gazillion years already lived or multiple served terms in Congress, is that there is not a lot of political equity that he could not stand losing.  Their criticism that he is a relative (to the above old guys) neophyte could have held traction if Obama was stupid or entrenched in his own political capital.  He's not.  He fears nothing, which is driving the Axis of Empty to distraction. Those guys have rarely had to deal with thems that don't take a knee.

The Middle East Scares Maureen Dowd Into Partial Semi-Excellence

Well, Maureen, the good news is that you managed to write cleverly to make some points regarding important issues, not just write cleverly to write cleverly.

The bad news is that the headline just sucks. "Is ‘The One’ Cocky or Commander in Chiefy?" makes me think you have it specifically written in your contract that no NYT editor ever, under any circumstances, save for force majeure, will tinker your prose.  Maureen?  You're not Buffy.  Let a grown-up edit.  See my headline?  I'd love to have a quit-witted editor come in and whip up something devastatingly cogent to slap up there, but look, I have to make do.

This is the best of it.  Maureen Dowd, my favorite Op-Ed underachiever, from today's New York Times:

A foiled and frustrated McCain — trying to get covered when the entire media world has gone fishin’ for Obama stories — took the Hillary tack of mocking the press for having a “love affair,” as his campaign said, with the senator. McCain is hopping mad that the surge that he backed, and Obama resisted, has now set the stage for the Bush puppet Maliki to agree with Obama’s exit strategy. But Obama has a better batting average with his judgment on how we shouldn’t have gotten into Iraq, we should have gone after Osama and we should talk to Iran and other foes, if only to better assess their psychology. Then we might have deduced that Saddam had the “Beware of Dog” sign up without the dog.

There now.  Was that so hard?  Did it take a trip to the Middle East, with other journalists about you, to make you finally pay attention to the serious-y stuff?

All is Better Than All Right With the World

The Hot Librarian is back!

All Is Right With The World

"Weird Science" is up on Hulu.

Compared To What?

Because I'm part of a country full of diverse ideas, cultures, ideologies and political leanings, I do my best to recognize that there are many viewpoints to an issue.  One man's ceiling is another man's floor.  Our country protects this diversity.  It fosters it, or at least it used to.  The melting pot analogy is one I always liked.  There's such richness in difference, particularly culturally.

Politically, because I'm an Obama supporter, it doesn't mean that I can denigrate another who supports McCain.  I stay out of comments sections of other blogs, left or right-leaning, whose participants make it a habit of calling one or the other vile names because of their support of a candidate.  It lessens the discourse.  "Shithead" never makes a cogent point.

That's my high road and I mostly stick to it.

However, I frankly don't know how anyone can watch the below and state that McCain has a better handle on what our country is about, needs to do, and is capable of, particularly as it concerns the military and the ephemeral "War On Terror" than Obama.  Never was it more painfully evident that McCain graduated in the bottom 5 of his class.  Notice that the interview is not full of talking points, careworn adages, and equivocations, the fallback position of those who aren't knowledgeable or adept at the subject matter.

And Lara Logan needs to do interviews with every politician ever running for any office anywhere in the US and expecting to be interviewed on CBS News.  I think if Obama had handed this woman a line of crap, she'd have called him on it.

Thoughts

A glimpse into my thinking process.  It's like dominoes falling.

I was reading Glenn Greenwald's opinion post on Salon this morning.  His headline is "Rendering Public Opinion Irrelevant."  A survey was taken by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) and apparently 71% of those polled in the United States believe the country should not take sides in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.  Seventy-one percent(!) would prefer the U.S. stay neutral.  Greenwald's gripe is that this opinion is reflected neither in the MSM nor mainstream political figures.  Neither is reflecting the constituency.

This made me ask why I wasn't polled for my opinion.  Who did the PIPA people poll?  (Heh - pickled peppers perhaps.)

Which made me think that an effective way to poll would be the internet, or at least a combination of the old-school show up at the door, call you during dinner way and the internet.  Combination because there are many older Americans who are not familiar with how "a Google" works.  (That will NEVER get old to me.)  Eventually, old-school would be phased out because of, y'know, how life works -- I'll say no more.

Which made me think about Sen. Obama's sophisticated approach to campaigning via the internet.  It's immediate.  It's effective.  It's inclusive.

Which made me think that if Obama is elected president, will he continue the internet infrastructure he has already built to glean the opinion of his constituency re issues?

Saving Grace

One of my favorite television shows, which I watch on iTunes because I haven't turned on my television in over a year, preferring instead to get everything I need from my laptop.  Wait.  Where was I?  Oh, one of my favorite shows is "Saving Grace" on TNT.  I was prepared not to like it because, honestly, that chick's acting can get on my last nerve.  Gimme a minute while I do "a Google" to find her name.  BRB.

Oh, yeah.  Holly Hunter.  She's annoyed me in practically everything she's done, except for "Raising Arizona," which live-action cartoonyness was perfect for her tics, drawl and overbearing demeanor in that itsy-bitsy body.  And "Living Out Loud."  I liked her in "Living Out Loud," but I think that was because she was part of a movie that I really really liked.  She was still full of tics and weird movements and choices that I ignored because I liked the movie a lot.  And she had an amazing dance scene and wore an amazing "little black dress."

To whit:

Back on topic.  "Saving Grace" is an hour long episodic on TNT about Grace Hanadarko, a hard drinkin' hard sexin' unrepentant fuck-up sinner Oklahoma City cop given a second chance to do right by life.  To that end, she's given an angel Earl, played by Leon Rippy of "Deadwood" perfection, to help her get on a righteous path.  Season 1 is out on DVD and iTunes and the second season is starting up availability on iTunes.

What I like about Grace is her reluctance to do good.  She's an addictive and dangerous personality.  She fights her family, her friends, her angel, to live the way she wants to even though she knows it's going to lead her to ruin.  Good for the series too because if she's redeemed, there's no story.  I've got a mother somewhat like that, at least in the "live the way she wants to" sector of character bullheadedness.  And I'm right now fighting the demon nicotine and sometimes losing but by in large winning, so I kind of feel Grace.

I also like the theme of the series, written (I believe) and performed by Everlast, whose down and out Bukowski-in-church voice writes "barfly salvation" all over the opening.  Catch it if you can and tell me what you think.

Scurrred to Look

Still here.  Writing.  Yeah.  No life.  Right now, I rather like it that way.  There's a new article by Maureen up at the NYT.

It's entitled "Ich Bin Ein Jetsetter."  Sigh.  No doubt it's about Sen. Obama.  Heavy sigh.

For those of my readers challenged in the years department, no doubt it's a takeoff on wildly popular John Kennedy's visit to Berlin when he stated "Ich bin ein Berliner" -- I am a Berliner.  I may have the capitalization wrong in that.  German capitalizes a LOT of words.

Clever, Maureen.

Well, let's see.

UPDATE:  It's so, so, so...what's the right word?...Why...why...it's whimsical!

Whew! That Was Close.

In accordance with my self-admonition, before I go reading all the many stories about Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki's agreement with Sen. Obama's timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq, I wanted to share a thought.

If you read about the drama connected with PM Al-Maliki's relationship with the U.S. you may come to the conclusion that I have.  While the long-term Iraqi occupation agreement was in play, Al-Maliki had his gonads in a vice.  If he sided with the U.S., he would be yoking Iraq to occupation by U.S. forces for an indeterminate amount of time in unbelievably Draconian ways.  If he followed the will of his country's people, the Bush administration cabal would be...highly disappointed with their man in Iraq.

There were hearings on the matter.  Two Iraqi Parliamentarians came and told Congress that they were not fooled by the agreement.  It would be a hostile occupation, pure and simple.  They didn't support it.  Their countrymen didn't support it.

That cannot be a happy position for the Prime Minister of Iraq to be in.  Al-Maliki found his voice, whether by patriotism or strong suggestion from the factions that operate in Iraq, and turned down the long-term occupation deal.  And the cabal is disappointed.

Then, Sen. Obama, who has proposed a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq for quite some time now, travels to the Middle East, thereby cutting the Republican screech of "What does he know?  He hasn't been there."  The world, enamored with the Senator, is all ears.

The golden opportunity of "the right time" has presented itself.  By Al-Maliki endorsing Sen. Obama's plan for withdrawal, he's coming up roses.  He has visible and popular support for not committing his country to unending occupation; managed to stick it to those that had him by his short hairs; and demurely inserted Iraqi opinion in the U.S. election cycle, not to mention robbing John McCain of his 100 years of occupation if necessary talking point.  And frankly, many others but I'd have to read more about that.

Were I Al-Maliki, I'd be breathing a sigh of relief.

Where In The World...?!

This is a time-sink that's actually worth something.  The Traveler IQ Challenge will humble you, but you will get better.  Bookmark that link but you can play it here too.

brought to you by TravelPod, the Web's Original Travel Blog ( A TripAdvisor Media Network member ) 

What He Said

I had been doing a crapload of research for writing a "playas and the game" post about the long term occupation agreement set forth by President Bush to the Iraqi government.

When I first paid attention to it, it was, as usual, through Spencer's blog Attackerman.  I wasn't too worried about its foolish implementation because I figured it had to go through Congress for approval.  But I was still caught off guard because for such a sweeping agreement, there didn't seem to be the type of coverage such a logistical and political agreement would warrant.  So I e-mailed Spencer about it.

What he told me was shocking.  The agreement was being set forth without the necessity of Congressional approval because it was not a "treaty," it was an "agreement."  Considering the history of the administration skirting around the law, I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was.

I was terrified the agreement would go through and our country and our troops would be committed to occupying Iraq for God knows how long.  Further, the next president, hopefully, Sen. Obama, would have the crappy choice of sticking to the hubristic deal or somehow breaking the deal with all the political fallout that could come from weaseling out of an agreement.

Oh, well.  Spencer beat me to it.  No surprise there.  As he was explaining to me when I felt I was asking stupid questions of him about the agreement that I just didn't understand, it's kind of his job.  Well done, I might add.  Damn.  He rips through this stuff off like butter.  I'm a little uncomfortable with Spencer's last sentence, but he's young and a firebrand and he's seen things up close, and I'm sure he's speaking from what he admits to being his wildly volatile temper and doesn't really mean it.  Or maybe he does.  I just don't want Spence mad at me.

If you don't read anything else, please read the link below.  It's important that you know.  If you don't agree with Spencer's viewpoint, at least it should make you investigate the origins and existence of the agreement.  There are many viewpoints in favor of the agreement.  I won't link because it's too early to get infuriated.  Google, like, National Review Online or something.  I think it important you know what the people tasked with ensuring the security of this country are capable of.  Agree.  Disagree.  But know.

Okay.  I'll stop shaking my finger at you now.

"Fight War, Not Wars"

Luckily, the agreement didn't go through and that's its status.  As of now.  I don't quite sigh with relief because this administration has a Macchiavellian way of getting what they want, no matter the cost.

Pygmies Are Pygmies Still, Though Perched On Alps

Holy cow, Chuck.  Bitter much?

What I find most interesting about conservative criticism of Barack Obama, is the craven envy.  It's personal and small and it drips from every word like acrid poison.  You can practically feel teeth bared in distaste in the telling.  Words out of place, descriptions bluely off-kilter, make their way into the lexicon of professionals whose job it is to write to their readership or speak before those who hold their opinion in some esteem.  Presumably it is to better them to their civic responsibility.

Karl Rove's description of Sen. Obama is not new news:

Even if you never met him, you know this guy.  He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.

I could parse this statement six ways from Sunday as to how obnoxiously classist, elitist and racially unrealistic Rove's statement is, but it's already been done and I don't really have to.  I know what I'm looking at.  I'm looking at small man doing his best to tear down someone to whom he'd lose in competition.

Beta males can despise alpha males for their inherent abilities alone.  And don't let a beta male get a little bit of power because he will claw his way through his betters to prove nothing more than he can.  I've observed the dynamic at the myriad law firms, talent agencies, studios, and corporations I have worked at with not a small amount of chagrin, because it's transparent, as is Rove's statement.  It's small.  It's petty and puerile and envious.

And as an aside -- am I the only one who notices that Rove's statement that Obama is snide, is a little, errr, snide?

Now comes my new favorite conservative envy-monger, Charles Krauthammer.

And what exactly has he done in his lifetime to merit appropriating the Brandenburg Gate as a campaign prop? What was his role in the fight against communism, the liberation of Eastern Europe, the creation of what George Bush the elder -- who presided over the fall of the Berlin Wall but modestly declined to go there for a victory lap -- called "a Europe whole and free"?

Lookit.  Krauthammer is no slacker.  Regardless of his clearly misguided political leanings, the man has accomplished.  And presumably he can think and reason.  Surely Krauthammer can recognize that these achievements that he finds absent from Obama's C.V. may be because he was, oh, I don't know, too young.  But he neglects to factor that in?  Why?  To make the point that Obama wasn't a part of something he was too young to be a part of?

Another aside -- so what are Bush the lesser's merits?  Just asking.

He continues:

Does Obama not see the incongruity? It's as if a German pol took a campaign trip to America and demanded the Statue of Liberty as a venue for a campaign speech. (The Germans have now gently nudged Obama into looking at other venues.)

Okay, I'd like to see the upshot of this.  Call me an Obamaniac, but I cannot imagine that he or his campaign would throw a hissy-fit because the Germans demur on his using something of theirs.  Honestly, does Krauthammer believe that Obama really needs the Brandenburg Gate to provide an impressive photo op? Obama's got, what, a gazillion in his scrapbook all frakking ready.

More green-eyed acrimony, following a sentence about Sen. Obama's autobiography:

It is a subject upon which he can dilate effortlessly. In his victory speech upon winning the nomination, Obama declared it a great turning point in history -- "generations from now we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment" -- when, among other wonders, "the rise of the oceans began to slow." As Hudson Institute economist Irwin Stelzer noted in his London Daily Telegraph column, "Moses made the waters recede, but he had help." Obama apparently works alone.

Well, now he's being deliberately obtuse.  I don't know what country Krauthammer was living in, but you could have knocked me and (I'll go out on a limb and say) him over with a feather when Obama won Iowa.  And to become the nominee?  Hoo boy.  I didn't think I'd see it in my lifetime.  Even if Obama does not gain the presidency, I will remember that night in the same part of my brain that holds the assassinations of the Kennedys and King, Armstrong walking on the moon, the shootings at Ohio State, the Apollo 13 disaster, Nixon resigning and 9/11 among others.  Krauthammer may not hold in esteem Obama's nomination the way that I do, but for historic value alone, he should.  It's small and petty not to acknowledge that fact.

And for the coup de grace of conservative professional opinion writing, Krauthammer offers this bit of transparency:

For the first few months of the campaign, the question about Obama was: Who is he? The question now is: Who does he think he is?

That's it?  That's Krauthammer's summation of his whole essay?  Why not "Neener neener neener?"  Or "I know I am but what are you?"  That way we can call this what it is -- really really high school.  And small and envious.

Using Pliers To Pull A Splinter

Hey!  A couple of thoughts of my very own about the New Yorker's cover.

I get it.  I do.  I think it would have played if the satirical component of the piece were more evident instead of the somewhat ham fisted screeching of the execution.

Huh?

Don't tell.  Show.

If the concept is to show the ridiculousness of the baseless whisper campaign attacks, then it misses the mark by telling what's being whispered instead of showing the wrong-headed effect of such whisper campaign.  That shouldn't be hard.  A cartoon is nuthin' but show.  It just takes thinking deeper than the obvious.  That cartoon is all obvious.  And easy.  And lazy, if I'm being completely self-righteous.  No.  I don't have a suggestion.  That's not my job; I'm not a satirical artist.  That's Barry Blitt's job.  He's done it before.  Just not this time, in my opinion.

And, for the record, those of you who say a joke can't be taken:  people may be outraged, without a sense of humor, because it has been all too easy and commonplace to depict people of color in such inelegant fashions without a thought of what effect such depiction has.  Go to estate sales this weekend and I guarantee you that there'll be a mammy cookie jar or some such other piece of memorabilia.  Still.  Now.  In 2008.  And I gotta see it among the LPs and bad oversized jewelry and mahogany secretaries and know that the cookie jar has been sitting up in someone's kitchen with little hands in it for possibly generations.  And the owner didn't think someone like me would be there; they thought they'd be selling their belongings to "collectors," not me, stopped dead in my tracks beside the teak coffee table I was going to buy, staring at a cookie jar toothily grinning back at me.

Yeah, I can be not amused and will cop to being a tad bit oversensitive, but come on!

As a matter of fact, any amusement of mine is an accordance to you, Mr. Blitt and New Yorker, that is given because I want to, not because your art/statement is particularly profound.  I'm looking past that, as I always do, because I'd like to believe your intention is not nefarious but indeed satirical in your simple ass way.  I also believe an artist's expression should not be abridged, no matter how unimaginative the art.

Boy, I think I got a little spun.

Clearly Helen Mirren Will Not Eat Her Heart Out Over My Young Ass

I can't post it here because it's copyrighted, but you really must look at these pictures of 63 year old Helen Mirren.  Damn woman.  I may never ever again complain about getting old.

This woman looks just wonderful, she looks in shape, and even in a bikini, she looks her age.

Woman crush.  Angelina should worry about my fidelity.

Knock-Off? Tryin' Not To Be.

What I'm finding I have to do is write before I read.  I find myself seeing something, having an opinion, and then going out into the vast interwebs and reading other people's opinions about the same thing.  Wrong.

Out there, they're writing what I'm thinking...and probably better and less verbose.  What I end up doing on MY BLOG, is re-disseminating information without my personal discourse.  Great if I want to be a conduit, but bad if I want my words to be out there.  I know nobody's really around to hear me (except for those I strong-arm-e-mail - hopefully) and that's okay; it's the process of me learning me that interests.  I also let myself off the hook because this is new and forming and I really don't have a gimmick.

Everywhere in my life, except for obvious observations (on which I pipe up shamelessly), I'm rather invisible.  I started Anonymous Sec's because I'm thinking more critically than I ever have before and to express myself both artistically (I do love to write) and in opinion.  Spencer showed interest in my opinions and writing and I seized upon the opportunity.  Funny that, I had to have some sort of validation before I would even venture to flourish.  And sad a little.

Okay.  Enough me me me.  That said and to prove the point that others are expressing what I believe, here are two opinions about the New Yorker cover that I wish I'd said, and would have if only I could write faster.  (Ha!  Oops.  Still me.)

From One Drop at Too Sense and Jack Turner (aka Baratunde at Jack and Jill Politics).

Yeah.  What they said.

Have You Seen My Barbie?

Maureen Dowd just depresses me.  Here she is, writing for a widely read platform and in possession of a rather highly functioning brain, and she uses both to no affective end.

If you check out the articles she's written in the last month, some, by their headlines alone, are so painfully vapid that you find yourself simultaneously wondering if you need a manicure:  "The Carla Effect," "An Ideal Husband," "No Ice Cream, Senator?" and finally today's "May We Mock, Barack."  And in mentally multi-tasking, you don't miss a word of her column.

In today's missive, she seems somehow wounded that Sen. Obama cannot be made fun of and admonishes that this will have some detriment to his campaign and presidency.

Joe Klein from Time's political blog Swampland said it best about today's Dowd column:

This is a really, really serious problem. I mean, if Obama is elected, she might have to start writing about...universal health insurance or alternative energy sources.

I've said it before, I'm saying it now and I'll probably say it again...Honestly, Maureen.

Um, Yeah, I Get It But Why'dya Hafta?

I spent the weekend in the north of the state with Anonymous Sis and fam, so I didn't get much writing done.  I plan to turn to it presently, though.  I have some thoughts on the New Yorker cover I'd like to share, but because my plane was 3 hours delayed out of Oakland and I didn't get home until 12:30ish and didn't get to bed until 2:00, I'm gonna carry my yellow ass to bed.

I'll think about it tomorrow.  In the meantime, my question -- what do you think?  Is this satire or racism or ill-advised or not that big a deal?

Ho.

I know cool don't mean shit to electing a president, but day-um.

This is why Rove hates you, brother.  The closest he's ever gonna get to cool is ragging on you.

h/t The Jed Report.

Somebody's Watching You

Worth a read.  Chris Hedges at The Los Angeles Times tells how the new FISA will hamper his job of reporting.

The reach of such surveillance has already hampered my work. I was once told about a showdown between a U.S. warship and the Iranian navy that had the potential to escalate into a military conflict. I contacted someone who was on the ship at the time of the alleged incident and who reportedly had photos. His first question was whether my phone and e-mails were being monitored. 

What could I say? How could I know? I offered to travel to see him but, frightened of retribution, he refused. I do not know if the man's story is true. I only know that the fear of surveillance made it impossible for me to determine its veracity. Under this law, all those who hold information that could embarrass and expose the lies of those in power will have similar fears. Confidentiality, and the understanding that as a reporter I will honor this confidentiality, permits a free press to function. Take it away and a free press withers and dies.

UPDATE 7/21/08: One Drop on Too Sense wrote a great comprehensive rundown of the FISA issue. Actually, I had come to somewhat agreeing with him since I wrote this...I was still a bit stung by the "caving." But One Drop completely convinced me.

Gail Collins wrote in The New York Times what I've been thinking about Sen. Obama but couldn't quite express; I wish I had written it -- but with a little less twee.

...But if you look at the political fights he’s picked throughout his political career, the main theme is not any ideology. It’s that he hates stupidity. “I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war,” he said in 2002 in his big speech against the invasion of Iraq. He did not, you will notice, say he was against unilateral military action or pre-emptive attacks or nation-building. He was antidumb.

Most of the things Obama’s taken heat for saying this summer fall into these two familiar patterns — attempts to find a rational common ground on controversial issues and dumb-avoidance.

On the common-ground front, he’s called for giving more federal money to religious groups that run social programs, but only if the services they offer are secular. People can have guns for hunting and protection, but we should crack down on unscrupulous gun sellers. Putting some restrictions on the government’s ability to wiretap is better than nothing, even though he would rather have gone further.

I would take exception to Sen. Obama's caving on the FISA issue. I believe that should have been something he took a stand on for a few reasons.

1. Wiretapping without warrant is constitutionally wrong. You can try to explain it to me six ways from Sunday and I still will disagree.

2. My boss had to sign a document yesterday and I noticed in the attestation, language to the effect of "I declare that I will uphold the Constitution..." I believe throughout the United States, all attorneys, when passing their state's Bar, have to attest to the very same thing. Sen. Obama, along with the right-wing activists (yeah, I said it) on the Supreme Court, had to attest to the same thing. Again, wiretapping without warrant is contrary to the Fourth Amendment and each and every attorney in Congress who signed off on the FISA bill as it stands, has broken their vow; interpretation be damned.

3. Telecommunication companies who followed Bush's requirement that they break the law have highly paid, very smart lawyers. Those lawyers broke their vow.

I gave another $25 to Sen. Obama's campaign on Monday, I think. I had all kinds of incentive because he is offering 10 lucky winners the opportunity to go to the convention in Denver. I wanna go. In the Tell Us Your Story opportunity they give everyone a chance to get their two cents in with their money (smart beyond belief by the way), I wrote the following:

Sen. Obama, though I am dismayed by your stance on FISA, I am still an avid supporter. I am a supporter not because you're the lesser of two evils, but because I trust that you will captain the ship with wisdom, energy, wit, humility and intelligence. Your presidency is what I believe my country needs. I believe you are up to the task and you have my support; in $25 increments.

I do hope, though, you can see your way clear to change your stance on FISA. I'd point you to Glenn Greenwald losing his mind over the issue, but I'm sure your campaign is more than aware.

In my opinion, guarding the Constitution is the right thing to do, even if it loses you the election. I couldn't be any prouder of you, but that would ring my patriotic soul greatly if done by my preferred candidate and a fellow citizen of my country.

Thank you for your attention.

Think I'm gonna win?

I'm not as screechy as Glenn Greenwald, but that's my story. I'm sticking to it. But I never expected to be happy with every choice Sen. Obama makes. Because he's my preferred candidate, I trust that his judgment is sound in the big picture.

Ronald Pagan, prolific and malleable commenter over at Jezebel made a good point about supporting Sen. Obama, as I believe Spencer (I can't seem to link to him right now) and Greenwald (Salon-Greenwald-any post at all) did as well. When your candidate is wrong, you have to be able to call him on it. Blind support is dumb. Sen. Obama hates dumb.

Wet My Beak

From Robert Novak's Washington Post Op-Ed of today:

But, in the opinion of the Clintonites, he did not open the door to his campaign, because he asked nothing of them. Big-money Democrats who could have expected to be named U.S. ambassadors by a President Hillary Clinton realized that they would get nothing from a President Obama. The train had left the station, and they were not aboard.

Huh?  I'm shaking my head at how naive I am.  Obviously, quid pro quo is so entrenched in politics that if a candidate asks nothing of you, it signals that you should then expect nothing in return.  Of course, that's how it works; at least in Novak's interpretation.

Sen. Obama asked nothing.  What did they offer?  What's the political rule for an offer?  I would like to think that Sen. Obama is asking nothing because it has always been his intention to not be beholden to big-money.  Could it be his objective is for big-money to be beholden to him?  Or beholden to bettering this country, as I believe big-money should.

Gawd.  I need a bath.

It's Not Easy Being Green

Hush, Jesse.  Just hush.  It's never going to be the way it was, you'll not be who you were, so my advice to  you is to stop coveting.

Don't get me wrong.  What you did was invaluable.  You trod through hell for my benefit.  For Sen. Obama's benefit.  For my brothers and sisters and closer to home, my nieces and nephews.  I was too young when they unleashed water and dogs and vitriol and arrogance on us, but even were I not, I'm not confident that I would have had your courage.  For that, I honor and revere you.

However, your reason for such a statement is transparent.  Even if you believed that Sen. Obama was condescending to the Family, surely for such an offense, suggestion of castration is a harsh remedy, even in jest.  That's what white folks did to us, Jesse.  How on earth does that come to your mind?

In this week, a racist of the highest order died.  He was an unrepentant bigot who may have, if not personally performed such a barbaric ritual, then certainly had no regret if others did.  Are you in any way like him?  I think not.

Don't then let what time, history, and the Almighty wouldn't allow for you, jaundice your opinion of what might be for another.

And dude.  Check the mic.

Who You Gonna Call?

Something occurred to me as I read and was attempting to understand Marc Ambinder's post about McCain's allegations of Sen. Obama flip flopping on issues.  The media is determining the talking points and their truths.  I know.  I'm late to the party, huh?

I want to read the whole thing and understand it in the same fashion I understand, for example, how to get a document filed with the court.  But it's late, I'm cranky, I'm tired and my patience level is nil.  Now see, I can't be alone in this annoyance with and reticence to slogging all the way through not only Marc's post but McCain's original release.

So what happens is I rely on resources I trust to give me the upshot, much like I clumsily attempted to do with day before yesterday's post about Kissinger.  Note bene -- television and its talking political pundit heads are craven and useless as resources.  To me.  But not to everyone.  People listen to those jackasses.  The upshot, however, can't help but be colored by the source - the disseminator of the information and her/his take on it.

The mainstream media (MSM), and I include bloggers in that category, is therefore captaining the information to the lazy masses.  No wonder people still believe that Sen. Obama is Muslim.

DreamBoats

This just makes me happy.  Luhdat man.

Where's The Care in Your Health Care Plan? Yeah! I'm Talking To YOU McCain.

I posted some info a while back on the old Attackerman about the candidates' plans for health care, with a link to a chart.  I love charts, particularly this one with a side-by-side comparison of McCain and Obama's health care plans.

Since I'm at an age now that health care is a serious concern vis-a-vis my employment, I give it the candidates the necessary consideration.  I'm not going to say you should too, but you should.

I found this Jack and Jill Politics link to The Jed Report interesting (and I just found the quote feature on Blogger).  As of now The Jed Report's site is a bit wonky but I'm sure that'll be fixed by the time someone's here to read.  Bueller?  Bueller?

McCain proposes to solve the "problem" of employer-based coverage by offering a recycled version of a Bush's health care plan: individual tax credits of $2,500 per individual or $5,000 per family (indexed for inflation) and elimination of the tax subsidies that support employer-based health insurance.

What this means is that under McCain's plan, employers could choose to continue offering employer-based health plans, but employees would be responsible for paying tax on the full value of those plans.

Not only would McCain's plan lead to a huge tax increase for those who maintain employer-based plans, but it would also dramatically widen the gap between health care haves and have nots without doing a thing to lower costs or improve the quality of coverage.

What problem?  It seems to me that everything that was handed to McCain is a problem for me to have.  See, I've never minded rich folks being rich.  I'm not envious of rich folks driving around in the Bentleys.  I just don't want them making it hard for me to have my Camry.

Let Me Hear Your Balalaikas Ringing Out

Well, here's a name I haven't heard in a long time.  My fault.  Until recently, I had been paying only superficial attention to national and international politics.  Ahh, for the halcyon days of Go Fug Yourself (which is now apparently part of some far reaching gossip web empire) and TWoP Buffy boards.

Henry Kissinger, recently in Russia, Kissingering with "leading political personalities as well as those in business and intellectual circles," renders his opinion in The Washington Post regarding U.S. / Russian relations.

From my reading, the upshot is:

--  Putin is Medvedev's supervisor, not his puppet-master.

--  They're looking to reorganize, redistributing power; everyone says so.

--  They're trying for democracy despite everyone in Russia's humiliation of basically losing the Cold War.

--  The chaos of the 90s was so fucked up, democracy ain't going to happen tomorrow.

--  Oh, and that democracy may not be your father's democracy.  Get used to it.

--  Tant pis.  They're going to need lawyers.

--  If it fails, Putin can always run again and win.

--  Keep U.S. mouthpieces off Fox News telling the world what they think Russia should do.

--  Russia is fucking huge with borders on just about every things-could-go-terribly-wrong region of the world; that's a lot to govern, particularly without interstates.

--  U.S. should shut up.

--  Uh, the Cold War is over.  Everyone get over it and stop acting like it's a high school rivalry.

--  U.S. needs to shut up.

--  Russia and the U.S. have just about all of the nuclear brawn in the world.  Perhaps it's in everyone's best interest to work together.

--  P.S.  Working together, Iran will bow before us.

--  Apparently Ukraine being part of the EU is important; I don't understand why.

The thought of Henry Kissinger schmoozing the Russian intelligentsia for info has a certain old school symmetry to it.  Hmmm.  Yeah, I'm green to this political critical thinking madness because my first question is why would Russians discuss this earnestly with HK, particularly knowing full well that he's going to go run tell.  What's the Russian agenda?  And what's HK's agenda, 'cause I know he's got one?  Is everyone angling for some US/Russian Superstate?  Is Ukraine being part of EU a matter of geography?  Are these the questions to ask?  Is this even now just all about Iran?  Have I've seen Smiley's People too many times?  Am I the one who can't let go of the Cold War?

A Rose By Any Other Name

Marc Thiessen at The Washington Post has written of Jesse Helms' accomplishments.  I guess he feels there hasn't been enough praise singing.  I cannot understand how anyone can get far enough past the bigot part of Helms' raison d'etre to offer hosannahs, but I suppose some do.

I piped up in the comments section.  It seems I'm obsessed with Helms' referring to all black people as Fred.

UPDATE:  Somebody's reading me and they suggested I add the comment.  Since I live to serve, from WaPo comment section:

Mr. Thiessen,

All of the many accomplishments of Sen. Helms you iterate are left hollow because of his gleefully adamant and unrepentant bigotry and the heartbreaking and inhuman destruction it rendered for generations. I can only surmise that you agree with his bigotry or chose not to see it or saw it and gave it a pass. However, if you agree that his bigotry was no matter, then say so. If you chose not to see it or gave it a pass, that's understandable; he was obviously a friend. But if denial or ignorance is the case, then I believe you should stand silent, if only for those who were as great as Sen. Helms yet never had an opportunity to excel or indeed, live, because of his bigoted actions.

I go by Anonymous Sec's, but you can call me Fred.

Anyone, Anytime, Anywhere

Brian Beutler, a young, very smart political analysis blogger for The Consortium Report, and friend of my young, very smart national security blogger friend Spencer Ackerman (Attackerman), was shot early Wednesday morning in DC.  He's alive and expected to make a full recovery.

It seems, though, that he could use a rent party of sorts; a little AFLAC from friends.

I know not many people are out there reading me, but those of my friends and family that are, take a look at Brian's work linked above at his name.  If you can see your way to kick in a buck or two, please do.  At the top of Spencer's blog is a link to donate via PayPal.

At the very least, please read this young man's writing and the writing of his colleagues and contemporaries, many of them referenced to the right in my links.  These are bright, talented young people who are possessed of a spirit to make things better.  I don't agree with everything they write, but good lord, does it make me think.  And write.

Time Do March On, Don't It?

I read most of these guys every day.  Am I just old or is a lot of critical thinking now done by 10th graders?

What Goes Around

I haven't seen Roots in a while.  It was broadcast on consecutive nights during my junior year in college.  I remember only bits and pieces of it because it was hard to watch.  I remember the view of the middle passage because it made me realize what stern stuff I come from and am made of.  I remember Kunta Kinte's name for white people (toubob) and though I try to never call or think bad names about people (I hate the term "white trash;" humans aren't refuse), the word holds a solid place in my consciousness.

What I remember most, though, is Kizzy's story line.  Kizzy.  Kizzy meaning "stay put."  Kizzy:  daughter of Kunta Kinte and Bell.  Kizzy:  living doll and close playmate to Missy Anne, who Missy Anne taught to read as a lark, causing, upon discovery, Kizzy to be sold away from her family as punishment for being able to read.  God, I cried as Kizzy was hauled away in a wagon, shrieking for her parents.  I remember Missy Anne, played by Sandy Duncan, one of my favorite actresses as a child, felt nothing though her carelessness caused the rending of a family.  I knew that that or something like that happened or more importantly, could have happened, to my ancestors.

In one of the last episodes of the series, there was a scene that has, like the word "toubob," stayed with me.

It is decades later for Kizzy.  She's old and has weathered losses of her own.  Missy Anne, also old, is in a carriage and stops for a rest, perhaps, at the plantation where Kizzy is now property.  Kizzy instantly recognizes Missy Anne.  Leslie Uggams, playing Kizzy, gives such a look of almost joy at seeing her childhood friend.  The cruelty of Missy Anne's youthful actions is not yet remembered by Kizzy.  Kizzy calls Missy Anne's name.  Missy Anne is hot and thirsty and demands, in that fashion that flints off the backbone that I and just about every person of color my age recognizes, that water be fetched by Kizzy.  Missy Anne holds no more recognition for Kizzy than she would an old shoe.  And then Kizzy remembers.

Kizzy walks to the well, dips a cup for water, turns her back to Missy Anne and her entourage, and spits in the cup.  Kizzy gives the cup of water to Missy Anne with a smile and satisfied eyes.

Jesse Helms passed on to his judgment on Friday.  Jesse Helms, who could no longer while out and about, hurl nigger, nigra, boy, gal, or if he was being kind, colored at a black person, instead assigning "Fred" for such same intent.  Jesse Helms, who surely knew that his actions emboldened like-thinking Americans to commit all manners of terrorism against fellow citizens, and was steadfastly unrepentant.  Jesse Helms, who rather than help grant hope for those whose lifestyle he didn't agree with, made it his business to bring to them to ruination.  Jesse Helms, who is being hailed in death as, in the words of President Bush, "...a kind, decent, and humble man and a passionate defender of what he called 'the Miracle of America,'" corrupting the definition of kindness, decency and humility.

Any judgment I might accord Jesse Helms is given to faults of my humanity, of which vengeance is certainly at the top of the list.  I try to resist thinking that.  I resist because I believe in something more profound than I -- nature, fate, balance, spirit, God -- that has a sense of justice more righteous than mine.  And on the selfish hedging your bets side, I really don't want to be judged harshly for the many mistakes I've made in my life when the time comes, if indeed that is how it is.

Still.  It's too bad I never got the chance to spit in his cup.

For A Friend

For a friend who I held weeping in my arms,

Because a heart feels awful in slivers on the bathroom floor,

Because heartache can't be ameliorated by logic,

Because sense don't come to visit when sense don't make sense,

Because empty nighttime is scary,

Because daytime's sun is sharp,

Because she is not ready to believe that she is her world,

Not he.

 

Mama Is Right About Clean Underwear

I nearly got creamed on Tampa Blvd. by a white with gold appointments Escalade full of trucker hat wearing youngsters bullshitting with each other throwin' up their hands to bass heavy hip-hop instead of paying attention to the road.  Thing ran the light way late and missed my middle-of-the-intersection-turning-left-with-nowhere-to-go car by an inch.  One.  Inch.  I watched it come towards me, not stopping and thought I was going to die.

My last thought?

Oh shit.  My vibrator is on the coffee table.  Eww.

Walk Down The Boulevard, Boys Like WHOA

Who is that pretty girl giving shout outs?

The Importance of Being Jewelry

Jesus, Chuck.  Let the flag pin go.

I have read bloggers that I admire state that they read a paragraph of an article or opinion piece and could read no further it aggravated them so.  I always thought, well, that's not fair.  It's piecemeal.  The whole isn't given proper consideration.

Now, I get it.  I could read no further.  Charles Krauthammer from The Washington Post:

You'll notice Barack Obama is now wearing a flag pin. Again. During the primary campaign, he refused to, explaining that he'd worn one after Sept. 11 but then stopped because it "became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism." So why is he back to sporting pseudo-patriotism on his chest? Need you ask? The primaries are over. While seducing the hard-core MoveOn Democrats that delivered him the caucuses -- hence, the Democratic nomination -- Obama not only disdained the pin. He disparaged it. Now that he's running in a general election against John McCain, and in dire need of the gun-and-God-clinging working-class votes he could not win against Hillary Clinton, the pin is back. His country 'tis of thee.

Any argument of merit Mr. Krauthammer might offer, which I will discover after my irritation dissipates, is belittled by this attempt to start his point with the fucking flag pin.  Surely there are sounder arguments to introduce in criticism of Sen. Obama.  I may or may not agree with them, but honestly, how can I intellectually entertain any further argument if Mr. Krauthammer finds sinister political indicators in a fucking flag pin.

And the snottiness of the last two sentences is exactly why this campaign cannot be reported with a higher, purposeful level.  This is acceptable for the press in proving a point?  Really?  As a representative of The Washington Post?  Looka here.  The extent of obnoxious criticism I can in good conscience muster on a blog that no one reads is "fucking flag pin."

I have been annoyed by Glenn Greenwald's tirades against Sen. Obama over the FISA issue, mostly because he is a brilliant lawyer who is more often than not on point but offers no pragmatic, workable and yes, political, solution for Sen. Obama to consider.  (Yeah, I know...not his job...but come on.)  Yet Mr. Greenwald has never let his tirades sink into the snotty muck of Mr. Krauthammer's last two sentences.

This political process crap is tiring.

UPDATE:  Now, see what happens when grown folks talk.  THIS is a reasonable criticism of Sen. Obama.

"For the Sake of the Girl with the Beautiful Swing"

This is beautifully written.