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.