OK, Seriously....

Fuck Capozzola. My whole goal was to talk about New Hamphire and other news, and then I see that this asshat is once again pulling the whole Mayakovsky "He who stands not with us today is against us" crap.

I'm not going to get in depth here, I'm just going to say it as it is. Jim, buddy, fuck you.

It's a sad day when I can point to Misha's defense of Atrios ahead of your agenda. I've always found you to be interesting and witty, and although I disagreed with you last time you gave an ultimatum, I kept reading because we all make a mistake or two.

Now you want to go through the same motions yet again because of something that Wonkette said?

Are you serious? It's not like Wonkettes a real human being, you know. It's part of the Gawker empire, and at best, it's meant to be infotainment, rather than a real deep spin or true policy wonkishness.

Look, I'm really sorry you lost your job, and I'm sorry you are looking to move out of Philadelphia, a city which you so clearly seem to love. I'm also sorry that Atrios pity on you did not lead to a more full tip jar. All in all, it seems that Karma has divined the precise reason that you cannot make a living as a pundit.

Atrios got sued, and kept blogging. Pandagon has had to deal with all kinds of script kiddies, yet they continue to write. You spend another day confusing your online persona with the real world and expect to get your propers. It clearly becomes more obvious why you lost you job, as well as why you can't get another.

In short: Go to hell. Get indignant about something that matters, not something that mildly bruises your ego for no reason other than that you apparently have a vested interest in MHO, even though the opposition isn't paying you, because otherwise you'd actually have less of an excuse to cry about your situation, and I have no desire to talk in run on sentence format.

In shorter: I'm thinking that there's a pretty legitimate reason that you are unemployable. Live and learn.

Yet more Local News, Only Not

I noticed that Vodkapundit has a wild guess that Edwards will be the eventual nominee. Having never really seen much of Edwards in depth until the last few weeks, and having read the comments over at Vodkapundit today, I have two basic theses upon which to draw.

1. I agree with Josh Marshall and James Carville. When you hear Edward speak, he's pretty compelling to hear. He's like Chinese food though. In the end I wind up feeling dissatisfied a couple of hours later.

2. Green's commenters really need to settle down. You'd think he'd just given his endorsement for messiah or something.

Update: Apparently Josh Marshall mentioned the Chinese food analogy first. My bad.

Quick Local News

Well, not Local News... More like local bloggers getting to write about things faster than I can, so I'll just write upon what they wrote...uh....upon. Via Gary Farber, and via Oxblog(it was a couple of days ago, and it's too late to search for the link. I see that apparently anti-Semitism is up in Europe. I hope that this is not true, although it does appear to be the case. Ha'aretz website didn't tell me anything about the poll other than what Gary mentioned, so I don't know whether or not the pollsters had a specific agenda on either side. The other evidence all paints a very bad picture, but this question, if it was phrased as I've seen:

Asked if Jews in their countries had a "mentality and lifestyle" different than other citizens, 46 percent said yes...

As I said, the other questions point to a very disturbing pattern, but if this is how this question was asked, then this is just horrible. I can get a bit literalist when answering questions like this, but I would answer this yes almost every time. Black people? Yes. Hispanics? Yes. Your best friends? Yes, I believe that they have a different mentality and lifestyle. Hell, I have a different mentality and lifestyle from my norms depending on the situation. My lifestyle on a Tuesday is not the same as my lifestyle on a Saturday. My mentality when I'm confident, happy and successful is far different from where my mentality would be if I were single, lonely, unemployed and homeless.

If this is the entirety of the question, then it was just a waste of time to ask it.

Local Flavor Part III

Apparenty our asinine "won't anyone think of the children" bill has been "weakened". If you read the story, note that the bill has been weakened by eliminating the provisions that fines accumulate for evey day that a vendor is not in compliance, not that the definition of indecent has been changed.

Keep in mind that I remember the days when Playboy was sold at the local gas station, but it was at the top of the rack, so that little kids couldn't reach it. These were also the same days where I could take a signed letter from my mom to the grocery store and buys her cigarettes, even though I wasn't 18. Odly enough, even with these wacky, wacky standards, I managed to grow up all by my own self without raping, killing or sodomizing any animal or person(without consent(the people, for the record)), thanks.

Just because the American Family Asociation types consider everything edgier than "Touched by an Angel" to be a danger to our moral fiber, doesn't mean that there's actually a problem. Show us that little kids are being sold Gallery Magazine and then we can talk.

Local Flavor II

The GOP led redistricting lost another round today.

While I think that the effort was deplorable, juvenile and pretty much contemptible. I think that they were legally right. As I understand it, the legislature is responsible for redistricting once every 10 years. Since the last redistricting was done by a judge (who did a very good job, by the way), they have every right to do it again.

That being said, I think that this is bad precedent, and sets the stage to make partisan politics become even more ridiculous. Eugene Volokh has an older post regarding a different issue entirely, but one that really hits the meat of the matter to my mind. Namely that the Republicans may be legally right to do this, but it doesn't make them ethically right.

Incidentally. This was the first blog post I ever read that made me sit back and think "Wow, that's exactly right."

Pointless butt-kissery aside, even though Eugene is talking about First amendment rights here, I think the general analogy translates. Sure the republicans have a legal case here, but the the true test of right and wrong is if they realize that it will do more harm than good to pursue it.

Local Flavor

I've been blogging quite a bit about national news lately, so today's updates will have a local flavor.

First up is a story that has been ongoing here in Colorado for a while. Essentially this entire cul-de-sac has been fighting over whether or not kids can play in the street. The residents have been calling the cops because it's technically illegal to play in the street. Now legislators are attempting to resolve the dispute. Why on earth has this become this big an issue? It's pretty damn sad that the state legislature has to be the group that determines common sense, especially when we come from a state that produces either incredibly bland or crazy politicians, that rarely accomplish anything.

Why can't we just get everyone to agree to the following:

1. Playing in the street, whether legal or not, is something that kids are going to do. Sometimes there's games that you want to play that can't be done in a driveway or a backyard. Keeping in mind that backyards nowadays are built roughly the size of a jewel case, and you're going to get situations where kids want to play street football or street hockey. They may even want to play kick the can if they've been in a coma since 1930.

2. Playing in a suburban cul-de-sac, while not as safe as, say, sitting on a couch covered in bubble wrap while wearing a helmet is not exactly the same as playing Russian roulette, sniffing glue, or running around with paint pens and tagging everything in sight.

3. Because you let your kids play on the street does not mean that they will turn out to be car thieves or hookers, nor does it make you bad parents.

4. Just because Douglas County is the whitest place on earth outside of Vermont, doesn't mean that you need to call the cops regarding every little issue that you may have. Police should get involved in situations where, you know, your life is in danger, or you come home to find that your house has been broken into, or your car stereo got ripped off, or your child has been kidnapped, or any number of situations where damage has been, or damage is imminent in regards to your life, liberty or property. NOT BECAUSE KIDS ARE PLAYING IN THE GODDAMN STREET!

5. Overall, on a scale of 1 to 10, with one being a child riding a tricycle while wearing a helmet, and 10 being a child trying to push crack in the Bronx at midnight after the Yankees blow game seven of the world series. These kids are at about a danger level of 2.

6. An entire neighborhood of adults who cannot attempt to resolve things in an adult manner are pretty much all complete cretins. Grow up.

In short. Somebody just needs to call a neighborhood meeting and give every homeowner there a swat to the back of the head.

Some Thoughts

Well, Bush certainly hit all the conservative buzzwords tonight. Talked about terrorism, NCLB, tax cuts and, um....Steroids? I'm a little surprised that he didn't talk about Mars or the personal savings accounts, and I'm even more surprised that he endorsed the FMA.


It was also a little more political in tone than I had expected to hear, in fact he was practically daring democrats to obstruct his new round of unfunded mandates.


Overall, he really hit the points that will win big points with the base and probably have the freepers all atwitter tonight, but I don't feel like I just saw him hit a home run tonight. The Democrats can take his thunder if they do it right, but can they? We shall see in the next few days.

PIzza's Here.

Back Later

Homeland Security

Heh. Some Democrats just applauded the expiration of the Patriot Act. Less applause from the right, than for the opening statement.

It looks at this point like the campaign is going to start off with "Only I can keep you safe."

He's just been introduced

Kennedy look like he's about to have a heart attack. The first partisan shot of the night is about Tax relief, followed closely by NCLB and medicare reform.

Now Kennedy just looks irritated. I guess the heart attack symptoms have gone by the wayside.

The State of the Union is "Confident and Strong".

Hmm...

Chalabi is sitting with Laura Bush. I'm not entirely sure that's a very smart decision.

Live SOTU Blogging!

At least until my pizza comes. Tom Ridge has a headset on. Also, his head is really, really large.

Now With Accountability!

He who can never come up with a very good handle (me), finally got around to geting an email address for this blog. Address is on the right under "Find Me".

More Campaign Coverage

After I'd already published the previous post. I realized that talking to candidates campaign managers must be one of the most boring things on the planet.

Of course Clark's campaign is going to say that they feel confident regardless of any resurgence in the Kerry campaign. What are they supposed to say?

"Well Wolf, of course we're worried that both the Kerry and Edwards campaigns are showing signs of life. Couple that with the fact that we're running against the former governor of Vermont and a senator from Massachusetts in NEW FREAKIN ENGLAND no less! We're really praying that Maureen Dowd has a bad experience with a bottle of ketchup in the next few days."

Also I just saw that Gephardt had Michael Bolton as entertainment at his campaign headquarters. For that alone he should have been forced out of the race and quite possibly forced to stump for the eventual nominee in Point Barrow, Alaska during the entire month of October.

Oh Iowa, Our Home and Native.....

The results are in. (Link via Daniel Drezner, by way of Atrios) I really don't have much to say at this point because well, it doesn't as a whole mean all that much.

Some friends of mine who are John Edwards fans were very happy (as they should be), but I cautioned them to remember that John McCain won the Iowa Caucus in 2000. There's still New Hampshire and South Carolina to go before awe can really even speculate on who the Democratic will be.

I do wonder if, in what is likely Gephardt's final presidential campaign, that he is at least a little humiliated that he could only outlast Carol Moseley Braun, but on the upside, his departure has guaranteed the eventual nominee the highly coveted Matthew Yglesias vote.

Also, Josh Marshall reports that Clark HQ isn't really worried about any momentum that Kerry has built.

Huh?

I try not to spend too much time just being snarky for snarks sake, but this is just the weirdest fucking thing I've read in a long, long time.

...Those who are opposed to space exploration are petty, small-minded, and unable to see the future that is right before their eyes. Travel into space is more than a mere dream, it is a key element of the further advancement of humanity. We live in a system of planets, all of which are ours- even Europa, despite what some might say...

Look. I've been a big fan of space exploration. I remember as a kid first getting interested in reading the paper when Voyager I began sending images back to the NASA. I remember that I always got excited to see the newest edition of Astronomy texts to see what new information we had learned about our outer planets, and I certainly feel that NASA has a role, even when others argue about the inherent dangers and ROI. Still. I'm guessing the Europa comment is some kind of EU crack, or apparently the Romulans are moving in on our territory.

...More to the point, space is the key to the American future. Whoever owns the stars will be the master of all humanity. No other nation, no other civilization, or other race can be allowed to take his honor. Space must be American just as Virginia or Colorado is American. It is our collective destiny, our birthright....

The key? THE Key? Not a sustainable economy? Not growth and productivity? Well, I guess the space race brought us an enormity of scientific and military advances, as well as Tang, comfortable pillows and advances in everything from watch making to watch repair.

And our birthright? Apparently I'd better head to the 7-11 and grab the last couple of Red Bulls of the shelf, lest the prophecy go unfulfilled.

Some will ridicule those who dream of Space Empire or speak of the future colonization of the Moon and Mars. Yet these will be the realities of the future, whether we are willing to accept them or not. The control and colonization of space will not only render humanity less vulnerable to the random chances of fate (an asteroid strike, for example) but it will also forever forestall the rise of another great power upon the Earth.

Why does this read more and more like a bad Science Fiction Novel? Oh yeah. Because it is.

Think about it for a moment. A single Star Cruiser, maneuvered into position, could drop dozens of weapons onto a target seconds after launch. Defending against such an attack, short of the use of other space vessels, would be essentially impossible. A handful of such ships could, if necessary, wipe an entire nation off the face of the Earth. In the face of such power, most rational nations would have no choice but to accept permanent American world rule....

The rebels will have to establish a base on Hoth, I guess. Seriously, WHAT THE HELL????

It may even be that we will find alien races that will have to be destroyed, lest they pose a threat, or that we will find races of servile aliens which might prove useful to us in other ways. I don't know if we will, and we won't know unless we try.

President Bush: Keeping the World Safe From Decepticons since 2004!

Stolen Thunder

Calpundit asks why democrats are criticized for pandering:

My point here isn't just to mock Mickey's prose — although there is that too — it's to wonder why it is that Democrats are forever being taken to task for pandering to their "interest goups" but Republicans aren't. After all, if unions are an interest group, so is management. If blacks are an interest group, so are whites. If environmentalists are an interest group, so are industrial polluters.




My take, quite simply is that the Republican party has developed a far better mastery of the language of politics than the democrats. Witness Newt Gingrich's words lists , for example. If the Republicans want to cater to Pharmaceutical companies, they call iMedicarere reform. Tax breaks for the wealthy are tax relief (this is accompanied by an example of a couple with four kids, a decent stock portfolio, two late model cars, and the dad is left-handed, but learned rather than by birth, thus they qualify, you know, just like you and me). Newt and the neocons aside, this is not a new game, it's just one that the Republican party is playing better than the Democrats.

The republicans know that for the most part, the Republican third of the nation is going to vote for anybody but a liberal, and the liberal third is going to vote for anybody but a conservative. They know that they have to appeal to the independent third to win, and they move to do that with tax cuts (helps out the pocketbook), increased entitlement spending(salves the conscience), the War on Terror (makes us feel all warm and snuggly at night), and corporate boosterism hidden behind a veil of compassionate conservatism( it'll create better paying jobs and save the bald eagle). The independent third likes all these things and goes along with the Republican talking points.

Democrats poke holes in these plans all the time, but the bottom line is that the general public is not interested in thick policy debate, or complicated tax code, or whether or not the French hate us. They want to hear things that make them feel better, not a complicated treatise on why this stuff won't work.

Cynic that I am, until the Democrats can say they can do all of these things better and cheaper than the Republicans and wrap it all up in a glossy package that makes it sound all cute and pink and fuzzy, (and most importantly, make it sound believable, while being too complicated to let anyone get his or her head around) they'll be labeled as the party that is beholden to their special interests.

Also: Think semi-snappy acronyms. Reduce the viability of school vouchers by calling it the CHOICE (Communities Held Together Over Investing in Children's Education)act.

Yes, I know there's no T in choice, but if the government can play fast and loose with acronyms, then so can I. FOAD.

This is Not Good News

I see the the US Supreme Court has chosen not to review the cases of the post 9/11 detainees. Now as fun as it is to attack John Ashcroft, I don't think he's evil personified, and I think he truly believes he's doing good. He just happens to be wrong.

That being said, civil libertarians the world over should be really upset over this one.

My First Link!

Thanks to Walter In Denver for pointing out the existence of this humble little blog. He's right. I should write more. Unfortunately today's motivation is practically nil.

We'll just hope the muse strikes tomorrow.

The Problem

It's late at night, and god knows I shouldn't be trying to rationalize anything at this point. That being said, let me proceed to do so anyway. For all the talk of Bush-hatred and the other abominations of the left, let me say that as someone who wishes himself to be libertarian, but can't quite make the plunge: the right can fuck straight off. Adam Yoshida, Misha, and the freeper brigade regularly wish to eliminate the left entirely. BAD FUCKING IDEA. Ultimately, gridlock is a good thing. The right, unbeholden is as dangerous as the left would be. For the most part, government gridlock is a good thing, as it prevents the extremist agendas from gaining too much traction. Too bad so many partisans can't see that, and too bad that so many of said partisans are on the right. Paul Krugman is a shrill, shrill man though. Go figure.

Just Shut Up Already

I'm pretty much over the Right Wing deciding that any movie, TV show, or CD that they like is keepin' it real for conservatives. I've seen more than one thread on Free Republic that talks about how the guys from South Park, or Eminem or the Lord of The Rings, etc must drive liberals nuts because it so obviously echoes conservative values.

Liberals like it (or dislike it) at probably about the rate of conservatives. Trey and Matt, Peter Jackson, Eminem and the corporate conglomerates that publish their work are interested in lots and lots of money. The artists are worried about lots and lots of money. They want to get something out that will get them attention and make them, you guessed it, lots and lots of money. Don't take it like it's a sign from the heavens when you agree with something that was designed for mass consumption. I don't think I'm politically aligned with the board of directors at the Coca Cola company, just because I happen to think they create a tasty beverage.

America Loves the Gays

In a rather sharp turnabout from his usual even-tempered posting style, Eugene Volokh savages Clayton Cramer over his argument that the Government likes homosexuals and IV drug users more than those of us who are straight and clean.

Note that Cramer mentions on his blog that he's getting more conservative as his children age. Apparently he's getting dumber, too.