I came across some musings by Walter Russell Mead the other day and sent them straight over to The Quiet Man via email to get his thoughts... he's weighed in and I thought I'd throw in my two cents as well.
Mead's column focused on the recent ruling by the Supreme Court which mandated that California free up to 46,000 prisoners because the overcrowded insane conditions had become some dire they had, in the court's view become an 8th Amendment violation. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, did something rare for the Supremes in that he attached a couple of photos to his decision, illustrating just how insanely bad prison conditions are in the Golden State. Justice Scalia read a scathing dissent from the bench- the gist of which I won't bother summarizing now- needless to say, he's against it.
Mead takes this one step further: his basic premise is that if you can't afford to keep your criminals locked up then you have essentially become a failed state. He spends a lot of time looking quite thoughtfully at some of the factors that have lead California to where it is today, wallows in some tiresome boomer nostalgia and then proposes breaking California up into five separate states. To his credit, he also targets Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas as candidates for potential break-up as well, but I've got to agree with The Quiet Man on this one... Mead makes some good points, but misses the mark.
To me, the biggest problem with California is structural- it's system of direct democracy has essentially neutered it's legislature and made the people the 4th branch of the government. And while it's hard to argue against direct democracy you just have to look at the flood of ballot initiatives that happen every election year in California to see the downsides of it. Everything from Prop 8 to Prop 19, to propositions that would have made it illegal for illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses and propositions governing the size and scope of chicken coops- all the way back to the infamous Proposition 13 in the 70s- I agree that direct democracy and letting the people have a voice- especially in a country like ours, which tends to ignore the people in favor of the rich and the corporations is a fundamentally good thing. But let's face it: California stands as the perfect example of having way too much of a good thing.
So first off, I'd put serious limits on these ballot initiatives. Originally a dollop of direct democracy was introduced during the Gilded Age at the end of the 19th Century to counter-balance the corruption and influence of the railroad barons in Sacramento- and by and large until Prop 13 and the 70s, ballot initiatives in California were nowhere near as ubiquitous as they are now. Prop 13 changed all that- and California Conservatives/Republicans are just as guilty as the state's Progressive/Liberal/Democrats in steering the state towards the proverbial iceberg. This is a group, ideological failure- and once the process was politicized, what was intended to be a tool for the people to check the power of special interests in Sacramento- WHEN NECESSARY- became something else entirely. Cali needs to get back to using direct democracy sparingly...
The other thing- which I'm not sure the Governator managed to get done or not- is putting redistricting in the hands of an independent commission. Iowa does it that way and our redistricting process has been fairly painless for about 2-3 decades now. (I think the State Supreme Court had to draw the lines way back in the late 70s and I think they went to a second and even third plan in the late 80s) Ah-nold wanted a similar model for Cali and that could potentially reduce the gerrymandered majorities in the legislature which I would imagine would leave folks up north and in the Central Valley feeling a little unrepresented in Sacramento.
Third, and I know this will make me seem like a loony tea partier- but shrink the bloated State Government and do it radically! California has more than 500 state agencies... I know it's a big state, but that seems insane to me. And I'm not saying you privatize everything, but you've got a responsibility to ask and take a hard look at what these agencies are doing. If taxpayers aren't getting enough bang for their buck so to speak, then off with it's head! (I'm not against government services or government- but I do expect government to at least try to be cost-effective, especially if it's my and everyone else's tax dollars at work... which I think is reasonable.)
There are any number of structural reforms that California could implement before splitting itself up- which, as The Quiet Man points out, probably is advocated more for it's dilution of California's electoral heft more than anything else. (Though if you think about it: when was California last a serious swing state in electoral politics? And would splitting off the north and Central Valley really dilute it all that much? The population centers would always be on the coast and I can't see Sarah Palin taking Los Angeles by storm any time soon.)
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Albums2010 #39: Born This Way
Lady Gaga has continued to surprise me and after listening to this album, I honestly hope she never stops. Now, I'll come right out and admit it- I've been a Gaga fan for awhile. Not a huge one- not like a 'let get some weird protruding bits of me and show them off and odd angles to the world' type of a fan, but I found her music to be a breath of fresh air- initially a nice throwback to the dance-pop craze of the early 90s of my youth and she was fun, creative, bringing a touch of avant garde loopiness to the music world not seen, since, well, Andy Warhol and the Velvet Underground really.
She dominated the pop charts with her first two albums and then promised that this album would be utterly epic and push the envelope in entirely new ways- and having listened to it all the way through, I can honestly say that she delivers and then some.
I'll go ahead and warn the casual listener: you'll probably have to listen to this twice to really dig down into the music. It took me a couple of times to do so- but once I did, songs started popping out at me all over the place. Tracks like 'Hair' celebrate the glory and awesomeness of, well, hair. 'Americano' is a latin-infused ballad about a lesbian wedding in East LA (I don't know why this sounds awesome, but it does.) 'Scheibe' is a hardcore German infused techno track and 'Government Hooker' just sounds, well, strangely amazing- it gets into your head and doesn't really let go all that easily.
There are a few tracks that stand out from the rest: 'Bad Kids' really got to me- it seemed like a fist raising soundtrack to a revolution, almost- and after listening to it, I really felt that if Gaga would have popped ten years ago when I was in high school I could have heard this song and felt just a little bit cool and a lot better about myself. Awesome song. 'You and I' is another track that popped out at me, because with a few adjustments and if you make it a duet and throw in Keith Urban or Kenney Chesney, Gaga could top the country charts with room to spare. The lyrics, the chord structures- everything about the song could easily translate into a straight up rock n'roll power ballad or even a country jam. Amazing stuff.
Then of course, there are the single already out there. 'Born This Way' everyone should have heard by now, 'Edge of Glory' is starting to grow on me- and it's hard not to at least have some mad props for a song that includes a face melting sax solo from the E-Street Band's Clarence Clemmons. But to me, the standout of the first trio has got to be 'Judas.' Naturally, due to the relgious nature of the song, it attracted codemnation from the word go- probably from the Catholic League and their ilk, but if you examine the lyrics and more importantly, watch the video, it's actually an extremely thought provoking re-interpretation of a lot of Catholic thought.
Overall: If there were any tiny seeds of doubt that Gaga was just a passing fad, this album blows them into tiny little pieces and then stomps on them just for good measure. In a word: amazing.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Tressel Did Go
Ohio State Football Coach Jim Tressel resigned today.
I can't say I'm all that sad about it.
UPDATED: And the trouble keeps brewing in Columbus... now QB Terrelle Pryor is reportedly under investigation as well. Again, can't say I'm all that sad about it. In a way, it sort of makes me glad that Iowa has settled comfortably into a level of success that puts it just on the outside of the so-called 'elite' programs of college football. You saw it at USC and now you're seeing it Ohio State: the arrogance of power...
UPDATED AGAIN: Sports Illustrated goes more in-depth with this and it's worse than they're letting on.
I can't say I'm all that sad about it.
UPDATED: And the trouble keeps brewing in Columbus... now QB Terrelle Pryor is reportedly under investigation as well. Again, can't say I'm all that sad about it. In a way, it sort of makes me glad that Iowa has settled comfortably into a level of success that puts it just on the outside of the so-called 'elite' programs of college football. You saw it at USC and now you're seeing it Ohio State: the arrogance of power...
UPDATED AGAIN: Sports Illustrated goes more in-depth with this and it's worse than they're letting on.
Blatter Should Go
FIFA President Sepp Blatter is insisting that all is right in the world of international futbol, even as corruption allegations are swirling around FIFA especially given releases of emails from the organizations now suspended Vice-President alleging that Qatar had essentially purchased the 2022 World Cup...
I think there needs to be a massive shake-up at FIFA and Blatter needs to step down. The ridiculous stands he takes- especially on things like goal line technology and his now ridiculous belief that all is right in the world are convincing everyone that this guy is a shady piece of work. For the good of the sport, he should step down before he does anymore damage to the organization.
(Interesting side note: does international soccer even matter? Or is this true talent and true mastery of the game to be found at the club level in various countries... discuss amongst yourselves, kids...)
I think there needs to be a massive shake-up at FIFA and Blatter needs to step down. The ridiculous stands he takes- especially on things like goal line technology and his now ridiculous belief that all is right in the world are convincing everyone that this guy is a shady piece of work. For the good of the sport, he should step down before he does anymore damage to the organization.
(Interesting side note: does international soccer even matter? Or is this true talent and true mastery of the game to be found at the club level in various countries... discuss amongst yourselves, kids...)
Friday, May 27, 2011
The Most Politically Incorrect Man In The World
...Prince Phillip, approaching his 90th birthday! As proof, the Independent managed to compile ninety of his all time great politicially incorrect statements. Awesomeness all round.
Mladic Caught
One of the unfinished chapters of the Balkan Wars of the 1990s came to a close yesterday with the capture of wanted Serbian War Criminal Ratko Mladic. Mladic had been on the run for years- wanted by the International Criminal Court for his role in the Srebenica Massacre during the war in Bosnia.
Justice will finally be done.
Justice will finally be done.
Miss Cleo Says... (Now It's Getting Fun Edition)
Texas Governor Rick Perry is starting to think about jumping in.
Sarah Palin is enjoying another bubble of 'will-she-won't-she' type of news. (She purchased a house in Scottsdale, AZ and is launching a bus tour of the east coast next week sometime.)
Bachmann sounds like she's in- has an announcement planned for Waterloo, Iowa next month.
Ditto for Santorum. Only his is going to be from Pennsylvania.
I think Rick Perry's flirtation might die by summer's end if the rest of the field steps up a bit. If it doesn't, it wouldn't surprise me if he does jump in with both feet and go places. The Establishment is itching to crown someone and he might just fit the bill and given the fact that Texas is attracting jobs, people and economic growth (not to mention interesting ideas like a $10,000 college degree plan Governor Perry has) it's hard to argue against Texas these days...
But that said: watching out for the dynamic duo from Minnesota. I really think Bachmann, once she gets going could really pop in Iowa- especially without Huckabee in the race. And Pawlenty still gets mad props from me for calling for an end to ethanol subsidies in downtown Des Moines and then flying to gray, geriatric Florida to tell a bunch of old people that the retirement age for Social Security needs to be raised. He's buddied up a little too much to Paul Ryan in recent days, but it was still an impressive start in my book...
Things are going to get nuts over the next month, kids. Watch out.
Sarah Palin is enjoying another bubble of 'will-she-won't-she' type of news. (She purchased a house in Scottsdale, AZ and is launching a bus tour of the east coast next week sometime.)
Bachmann sounds like she's in- has an announcement planned for Waterloo, Iowa next month.
Ditto for Santorum. Only his is going to be from Pennsylvania.
I think Rick Perry's flirtation might die by summer's end if the rest of the field steps up a bit. If it doesn't, it wouldn't surprise me if he does jump in with both feet and go places. The Establishment is itching to crown someone and he might just fit the bill and given the fact that Texas is attracting jobs, people and economic growth (not to mention interesting ideas like a $10,000 college degree plan Governor Perry has) it's hard to argue against Texas these days...
But that said: watching out for the dynamic duo from Minnesota. I really think Bachmann, once she gets going could really pop in Iowa- especially without Huckabee in the race. And Pawlenty still gets mad props from me for calling for an end to ethanol subsidies in downtown Des Moines and then flying to gray, geriatric Florida to tell a bunch of old people that the retirement age for Social Security needs to be raised. He's buddied up a little too much to Paul Ryan in recent days, but it was still an impressive start in my book...
Things are going to get nuts over the next month, kids. Watch out.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
California Unlocked
In an interesting decision handed down by the Supreme Court yesterday slammed the California Prisons system for it's gross overcrowding and quite frankly ludicrous conditions and the Supremes sent down an opinion which pretty much told the Golden State to release up to 46,000 inmates to get this mess under control.
A couple of interesting things about this case: first, (courtesy of Slate) we get a round up in which is revealed that Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority attached some photos of the conditions in California prisons to his opinion. I think that's happened maybe one other time in the history of the Supreme Court. Maybe. Whatever- point is, it doesn't happen often. They're usually about telling, not showing.
Second of all, you know who was pissed off by all of this? Oh, that's right- Justice Scalia, who read a scathing dissent from the bench which sounds like vintage evil genius Scalia. Enjoy it here...
The Golden State's woes continue I guess and don't do much to convince me of the glories of Progressive politics. In fact, they don't seem to be making much progress at all.
A couple of interesting things about this case: first, (courtesy of Slate) we get a round up in which is revealed that Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority attached some photos of the conditions in California prisons to his opinion. I think that's happened maybe one other time in the history of the Supreme Court. Maybe. Whatever- point is, it doesn't happen often. They're usually about telling, not showing.
Second of all, you know who was pissed off by all of this? Oh, that's right- Justice Scalia, who read a scathing dissent from the bench which sounds like vintage evil genius Scalia. Enjoy it here...
The Golden State's woes continue I guess and don't do much to convince me of the glories of Progressive politics. In fact, they don't seem to be making much progress at all.
Hmmmm... Higher Ed.
Couple of interesting things on the state of higher education:
Some advice to prospective PHD's and the intriguing concept of paying people NOT to go to college...
Now, there's a lot of chit-chat going around about the state of higher education- mainly courtesy of the Almighty Instapundit, but it's a conversation worth having. Something in our education system at all levels is plainly not working... the right answers if there are any are downright impossible to figure out but again one thing is for certain- a change is going to have to come. I don't know what that's going to look like, but the more conversations like this people have, the more potential solutions could come from it.
Some advice to prospective PHD's and the intriguing concept of paying people NOT to go to college...
Now, there's a lot of chit-chat going around about the state of higher education- mainly courtesy of the Almighty Instapundit, but it's a conversation worth having. Something in our education system at all levels is plainly not working... the right answers if there are any are downright impossible to figure out but again one thing is for certain- a change is going to have to come. I don't know what that's going to look like, but the more conversations like this people have, the more potential solutions could come from it.
A Modest Proposal
The Big Ten Football Title Game:
Shouldn't be played in the Lucas Oil Field Dome or wherever the hell the Colts play. It shouldn't even be played in Soldier Field... brace yourselves kids, because I'm going to make a bold suggestion:
Rotate it around!
Seriously. I think that would rock- every school would get a chance to showcase it's campus and it's stadium and the towns would get a possible economic boost from the title game now and again and it would show a national television audience the depth and variety of the Big 10 Conference. We wouldn't be playing in a prepackaged, corporate title game- we'd be doing something unique and interesting.
There are some obvious rules you'd have to consider. If your school is set to host and you wind up in the title game, then you get bumped to the next school down. There are some concerns about travel costs if the title game is someplace like Nebraska or Penn State at the far end, geographically speaking of the Big Ten Conference but if fans are willing to go the distance for the regular season, I don't see why they wouldn't for a Big Ten Title Game.
It's a complicated notion, I have to admit- but it's an interesting one.
Shouldn't be played in the Lucas Oil Field Dome or wherever the hell the Colts play. It shouldn't even be played in Soldier Field... brace yourselves kids, because I'm going to make a bold suggestion:
Rotate it around!
Seriously. I think that would rock- every school would get a chance to showcase it's campus and it's stadium and the towns would get a possible economic boost from the title game now and again and it would show a national television audience the depth and variety of the Big 10 Conference. We wouldn't be playing in a prepackaged, corporate title game- we'd be doing something unique and interesting.
There are some obvious rules you'd have to consider. If your school is set to host and you wind up in the title game, then you get bumped to the next school down. There are some concerns about travel costs if the title game is someplace like Nebraska or Penn State at the far end, geographically speaking of the Big Ten Conference but if fans are willing to go the distance for the regular season, I don't see why they wouldn't for a Big Ten Title Game.
It's a complicated notion, I have to admit- but it's an interesting one.
They've Done It Again
Join me for a moment, won't you to mourn the passing of a good television show:
Fox has cancelled 'The Chicago Code.'
I'm not usually one for 'cop shows.' Network television is littered with Law and Orders, Criminals Minds, CSIs and who knows what else- they're formulaic, they've been done to death and they're oftentimes very tiresome. There aren't that many good ones that stand out from the pack and 'The Chicago Code' immediately grabbed my attention. Whether it was the fantastic cast with Jennifer Beals, Jason Clarke and Delroy Lindo all proving their amazing talents or the writing or the plots or the fact that this was a show that didn't have a formula and got deep into the culture and history of the sometimes amazingly corrupt city of Chicago.
It could have been the next great show- but the ratings weren't where the money-grubbers at Fox wanted them to be and so, once again, showing no patience at all, they shit-canned the show.
What a pity- television is cold, cruel world and I guess intelligent, well-written television shows don't pay the bills like they should.
Fox has cancelled 'The Chicago Code.'
I'm not usually one for 'cop shows.' Network television is littered with Law and Orders, Criminals Minds, CSIs and who knows what else- they're formulaic, they've been done to death and they're oftentimes very tiresome. There aren't that many good ones that stand out from the pack and 'The Chicago Code' immediately grabbed my attention. Whether it was the fantastic cast with Jennifer Beals, Jason Clarke and Delroy Lindo all proving their amazing talents or the writing or the plots or the fact that this was a show that didn't have a formula and got deep into the culture and history of the sometimes amazingly corrupt city of Chicago.
It could have been the next great show- but the ratings weren't where the money-grubbers at Fox wanted them to be and so, once again, showing no patience at all, they shit-canned the show.
What a pity- television is cold, cruel world and I guess intelligent, well-written television shows don't pay the bills like they should.
Monday, May 23, 2011
T-Paw Is In...
Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty has jumped into the 2012 Campaign, officially announcing that's he's running at an event today in Des Moines. Having lived in Minnesota for some of his tenure, I can honestly say that I'm fairly indifferent about him- and he scored big points in my personal playbook for having the balls to stand up- in Iowa no less and say that ethanol subsidies should be phased out.
Impressively ballsy. Hopefully it doesn't kill him in Iowa...
I'd have to learn a little more about his specific policy positions to be sure, but tentatively, I'd say I could tolerate a potential President Pawlenty. And potentially tolerating Republicans is a big step for me.
Impressively ballsy. Hopefully it doesn't kill him in Iowa...
I'd have to learn a little more about his specific policy positions to be sure, but tentatively, I'd say I could tolerate a potential President Pawlenty. And potentially tolerating Republicans is a big step for me.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
He's Back.
Vladimir Putin, that is. Apparently, he's decided he wants his old job back. Problem is that President Medvedev is still... well, President. So either he goes quietly and Putin comes back or he grows a spine and takes Putin on.
I'm hoping for the latter. Come on, Robin. Become Nightwing and kick some ass.
I'm hoping for the latter. Come on, Robin. Become Nightwing and kick some ass.
There's Got To Be A Morning After
Well, we're still here.
It's hard to know what I personally believe about the end times and the potential second coming of Jesus. Was I raised to believe? I was. Do I still believe? I do. Could I be a lot better about it? Yes, I could. But the environment I was raised in was fundamentally disputational. As kids, we couldn't just issue blanket statements about anything without being asked, sometimes pointedly, sometimes not, to explain exactly what we meant. It makes our family dinner table look like a bad episode of Crossfire a lot of the time and irritates the shit out of my sisters pretty much most of the time, but it worked after a fashion.
You might think questioning everything and trying understand the why of a belief undermines the essential concepts of Christian theology: faith. But I think it helps me to try and think how I could be a better believer at the end of the day. It's not enough for me just to believe- I've got to understand why I believe what I believe and seek to challenge those beliefs whenever and wherever I can. It makes them stronger, I think.
But it doesn't make me seem like an especially devout believer. I have a lot of respect for people whose faith can literally move mountains and who have this unshakeable belief in a higher power- but I just don't have that. I think theologically, I'm always going to be in a wrestling match with it and I'm OK with that. It's just my style.
This whole Rapture thing though, it's got me a little down. First of all, I have to feel for people who jumped onboard this bandwagon with everything they had. How they have faith left to go on is beyond me... second of all, if there was a Rapture, it'd be nice to know what we're being judged on. I know I'm a flawed human being. I sin. Everybody does- but I can honestly look in the mirror and say that I genuinely try to do the right thing each and every day. Maybe I'm just a decent human being that way, I don't know- but if the Good Lord isn't grading us on a curve, I think I'll be in trouble...
It's hard to know what I personally believe about the end times and the potential second coming of Jesus. Was I raised to believe? I was. Do I still believe? I do. Could I be a lot better about it? Yes, I could. But the environment I was raised in was fundamentally disputational. As kids, we couldn't just issue blanket statements about anything without being asked, sometimes pointedly, sometimes not, to explain exactly what we meant. It makes our family dinner table look like a bad episode of Crossfire a lot of the time and irritates the shit out of my sisters pretty much most of the time, but it worked after a fashion.
You might think questioning everything and trying understand the why of a belief undermines the essential concepts of Christian theology: faith. But I think it helps me to try and think how I could be a better believer at the end of the day. It's not enough for me just to believe- I've got to understand why I believe what I believe and seek to challenge those beliefs whenever and wherever I can. It makes them stronger, I think.
But it doesn't make me seem like an especially devout believer. I have a lot of respect for people whose faith can literally move mountains and who have this unshakeable belief in a higher power- but I just don't have that. I think theologically, I'm always going to be in a wrestling match with it and I'm OK with that. It's just my style.
This whole Rapture thing though, it's got me a little down. First of all, I have to feel for people who jumped onboard this bandwagon with everything they had. How they have faith left to go on is beyond me... second of all, if there was a Rapture, it'd be nice to know what we're being judged on. I know I'm a flawed human being. I sin. Everybody does- but I can honestly look in the mirror and say that I genuinely try to do the right thing each and every day. Maybe I'm just a decent human being that way, I don't know- but if the Good Lord isn't grading us on a curve, I think I'll be in trouble...
Who Killed Allende?
Chile is going to find out whether he shot himself as Pinochet's troops closed in or whether he was killed by them.
Miss Cleo Says... (Post-Rapture Edition)
Well, I wanted to wait until August before doing another one of these, but the landscape is shifting by the day in the race for the Republican Nomination:
Mitch Daniels is a no-go.
Herman Cain is officially in. Tim Pawlenty is expected to follow suit.
Michelle Bachmann might jump in later this week and Sarah Palin has mentioned 'fire in her belly' and is apparently buying a house in Arizona, two things potentially indicative of a Presidential run.
This is fascinating. (I'm probably going to be saying that a lot, so bear with me.) Usually Republicans are quite orderly and like to pick a horse early on and stick with said horse all the way through the perfectly managed Convention followed by the general election. They're usually a paragon of efficiency about it but the problem is that they have no horse to pick yet. So it's quite fascinating.
(Look for buzz to grow about Chris Christie and Rick Perry- neither of them have even expressed an interest, but Mitch Daniels has left a huge hole in the race that either one of them could be drafted to fill.)
Mitch Daniels is a no-go.
Herman Cain is officially in. Tim Pawlenty is expected to follow suit.
Michelle Bachmann might jump in later this week and Sarah Palin has mentioned 'fire in her belly' and is apparently buying a house in Arizona, two things potentially indicative of a Presidential run.
This is fascinating. (I'm probably going to be saying that a lot, so bear with me.) Usually Republicans are quite orderly and like to pick a horse early on and stick with said horse all the way through the perfectly managed Convention followed by the general election. They're usually a paragon of efficiency about it but the problem is that they have no horse to pick yet. So it's quite fascinating.
(Look for buzz to grow about Chris Christie and Rick Perry- neither of them have even expressed an interest, but Mitch Daniels has left a huge hole in the race that either one of them could be drafted to fill.)
Squeezing Colonel Nutbag
Seems like the noose is tigtening around Qadaffi in Libya. The rebels have managed to secure Misrata or at least ease the pressure on that city, there's another front opening up in the mountains south of Tripoli and it looks like there might be an organized offensive towards Brega in the East.
The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for him. Another Minister has defected.
It's not looking good for the Colonel. And that's a wonderful thing in my book. A couple of things to hurry this a long: diplomatic recognition for the NTC would be nice, Mr. President... I mean, if we're going to jump in here and spend political and military capitol, let's do the job right. But I think a little more cash and a little more help in the right places as well as a more pressure on Qadaffi will eventually get this job done. Maybe even sooner than people think.
The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for him. Another Minister has defected.
It's not looking good for the Colonel. And that's a wonderful thing in my book. A couple of things to hurry this a long: diplomatic recognition for the NTC would be nice, Mr. President... I mean, if we're going to jump in here and spend political and military capitol, let's do the job right. But I think a little more cash and a little more help in the right places as well as a more pressure on Qadaffi will eventually get this job done. Maybe even sooner than people think.
ANC Slips A Bit
Some interesting news from South Africa's local elections: looks like the ANC is coming under an increasing amount of pressure from the opposition Democratic Alliance- now, it's not enough to make it a horse race (the ANC ran at about 66% to the DA's 15% nationally) but the Democratic Alliance is gaing- and more to the point, they're starting to slowly gain voters across the racial spectrum in South Africa.
I think if the ANC takes a hard look at these electoral results, I think they'll find that most people are pretty happy with the increasing quality of public services in South Africa, but beware cronyism and corruption, because it looks like the voters are starting to consider the Democratic Alliance as potentially a real alternative. While no doubt, South Africa's come along way since 1994 one thing they've yet to encounter is the ANC losing an election. That's a big test of any democracy- do you willing cede power to your opponents? I'm not saying that the ANC wouldn't do that- but a vital, strong opposition to challenge them and hold their feet to the fire AND potentially boot them from power can only be a good thing.
I think if the ANC takes a hard look at these electoral results, I think they'll find that most people are pretty happy with the increasing quality of public services in South Africa, but beware cronyism and corruption, because it looks like the voters are starting to consider the Democratic Alliance as potentially a real alternative. While no doubt, South Africa's come along way since 1994 one thing they've yet to encounter is the ANC losing an election. That's a big test of any democracy- do you willing cede power to your opponents? I'm not saying that the ANC wouldn't do that- but a vital, strong opposition to challenge them and hold their feet to the fire AND potentially boot them from power can only be a good thing.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Oh I see...
changing the rules, are we? Family Radio has issued a hasty correction, saying that it's all going to go down at the stroke of midnight in Jerusalem. Earthquakes and raptures have been failing to materialize all day as 6PM keeps inching its way around the globe...
If Family Radio and Harold Camping get this one wrong, then they will officially be 0 for 2.
If Family Radio and Harold Camping get this one wrong, then they will officially be 0 for 2.
Friday, May 20, 2011
If the World ended tomorrow...
...what would you do?
The Guardian would like to know.
(And on a side note: if the world actually does end tomorrow, I'll be having a beer, hopefully enjoying some nice weather.)
The Guardian would like to know.
(And on a side note: if the world actually does end tomorrow, I'll be having a beer, hopefully enjoying some nice weather.)
Bookshot #23: A Game of Thrones
I try and avoid doorstop fantasy novels. After Robert Jordan's never-ending Wheel of Time series, I became cynical and disillusioned with the notion that a series of novels that stretches literally thousands and thousands of pages and shows no sign of ending just isn't something I can get jiggy with anymore. I mean, Tolkein at least stopped after three books. Robert Jordan literally died before finishing his series- which I believe is hovering somewhere in the 13, 14 book range at this point and still not done.
So it was with some trepidation that I picked up George RR Martin's A Game of Thrones. I did so for a couple of reasons: first, I knew that HBO was making it into a television series (which, by all accounts is kicking ass) and second, I was deep into writing my own, well, I guess we can call it a novel now and I was looking to get a good, inspirational injection of political intrigues to help me spice up my own writing a bit.
Happily, Martin delivers the goods and then some. A Game of Thrones is set in the fictional land of Westeros, which is loosely based on medieval Europe and as the novel opens, trouble is brewing. It's been fifteen years since a brutal Civil War shook the land and the evil tyrant King Aerys was overthrown by a couple of our heroes, Eddard Stark a lord of the North and the current King Robert Baratheon who sits on the throne of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros- albeit chafing and resenting the somewhat mundane duties of ruling his kingdom. Across the Sea, the last children of the old Tyrant plot to return to reclaim their lost throne and in Westeros plots and intrigues are swirling.
In short order, Eddard Stark is pried away from his northern castle and family to be 'Hand To The King', his friend Robert in the South and when the King is killed in a hunting accident all bets are off. Civil War erupts and multiple people start claiming the throne and the fragile peace that has held for fifteen years flies apart. As the novel closes, the winds of war are blowing. And I was somewhat irritated because by the end of the book, I knew that I was hooked. I was going to have to buy every last one of these books and see the story through to the very end.
There's more to the story than the vague plot synopsis I just wrote, of course. There are bad guys, good guys, shifting loyalties, a kaleidoscope of motivations driving each and every character- it's an impressive world that Martin creates and it's packed with an amazing amount of detail. For sure, Martin thrusts himself right up there into the top ranks of fantasy authors. I don't know if he can be put right up there with Tolkein, but if there's a step below him, Martin can be slotted right in there. The other thing he does that I found interesting was that every chapter he writes is told from the point of view of a different character. This probably explains why his books are so long and heaven only knows what he has to do to keep them all straight, but what it does do is allow each character to develop almost in a vacuum and somehow he manages to move the story along while he does this.
Overall: A fantasy gem. I'm hooked. Almost wish I had HBO so I could watch the television show.
Yes Please!
FIFA Mafia Don, I mean President Sepp Blatter said that there's a possibility that Qatar may be stripped of the 2022 World Cup if an investigation finds there were improprieties in the voting process.
I think it's a safe bet there probably were... this is the organization that is stubbornly against things like goal line technology for reasons passing understanding and is indeed, probably quite corrupt when you get right down to it. With the English Football Association abstaining from the upcoming vote on FIFA President, it seems pretty clear that there's something rotten in the Kingdom of Footie...
I think it's a safe bet there probably were... this is the organization that is stubbornly against things like goal line technology for reasons passing understanding and is indeed, probably quite corrupt when you get right down to it. With the English Football Association abstaining from the upcoming vote on FIFA President, it seems pretty clear that there's something rotten in the Kingdom of Footie...
Another Ride On The Merry-Go-Round
Well, I guess someone had to come right out and say it, so why not President Obama?
In a major policy address on the Middle East yesterday, the President called for a viable Palestinian State to be created based on the 1967 borders Israel once had. The Israelis, predictably, were not at all pleased by this and will probably make great efforts to ignore this as much as they possibly can which to me, makes no sense at all- either from their point of view or the President's point of view.
First of all: demographics is destiny. There are just going to be more Palestinians than Israelis. Numbers don't lie- and those demographics threaten the essentially exclusionary nature of Israel. If you want to be the Jewish state, you can't have the West Bank and Gaza Strip- and if you're fine with not being a Jewish state, then you've got to be some other kind of state one that recognizes the basic rights of the Palestinian people.
Second of all: This, I think, was a fairly useless statement to make on the part of the President. Did he really think that Israel was going to say- 'OK then. Let's DO this.' and everything would go from there? Probably not- I seriously doubt he's that dumb, but more to the point, he doesn't have a lot of political capital to spend in the region right now and this statement pretty much ensures nothing will happen. The Israelis have spent three decades or more trying to create 'facts on the ground' in the West Bank so they can grab as much land as they can- the only politician over there who could have sold them on a land for peace deal that Obama is envisioning was Ariel Sharon. Netanyahu might agree in principle, but he doesn't have the chops to get it done.
But, give President Obama props. He put it right out there- there needs to be a contiguous, viable, Palestinian state in the Territories. There needs to be an end to the occupation- and even though Israel may cross its fingers and hope Obama gets ousted next year (Romney has already weighed in) the facts remain: any President who is serious about a last peace is going to have to be blunt and Israel nor the Palestinians are going to be able to hide from that.
In a major policy address on the Middle East yesterday, the President called for a viable Palestinian State to be created based on the 1967 borders Israel once had. The Israelis, predictably, were not at all pleased by this and will probably make great efforts to ignore this as much as they possibly can which to me, makes no sense at all- either from their point of view or the President's point of view.
First of all: demographics is destiny. There are just going to be more Palestinians than Israelis. Numbers don't lie- and those demographics threaten the essentially exclusionary nature of Israel. If you want to be the Jewish state, you can't have the West Bank and Gaza Strip- and if you're fine with not being a Jewish state, then you've got to be some other kind of state one that recognizes the basic rights of the Palestinian people.
Second of all: This, I think, was a fairly useless statement to make on the part of the President. Did he really think that Israel was going to say- 'OK then. Let's DO this.' and everything would go from there? Probably not- I seriously doubt he's that dumb, but more to the point, he doesn't have a lot of political capital to spend in the region right now and this statement pretty much ensures nothing will happen. The Israelis have spent three decades or more trying to create 'facts on the ground' in the West Bank so they can grab as much land as they can- the only politician over there who could have sold them on a land for peace deal that Obama is envisioning was Ariel Sharon. Netanyahu might agree in principle, but he doesn't have the chops to get it done.
But, give President Obama props. He put it right out there- there needs to be a contiguous, viable, Palestinian state in the Territories. There needs to be an end to the occupation- and even though Israel may cross its fingers and hope Obama gets ousted next year (Romney has already weighed in) the facts remain: any President who is serious about a last peace is going to have to be blunt and Israel nor the Palestinians are going to be able to hide from that.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Miss Cleo Says... (2012 GOP Edition)
Call me now!
So where are we with this crazy Presidential Election coming up? Who's going where and who's doing what? The latest rundown:
Trump is out.
Huckabee is out.
Newt is in- but promptly pissed everyone off by saying this. More on that later.
Romney raised a shit-ton of money. More on that later too.
Bachmann continues her flirtation.
Ron Paul is in.
Also in the mix: Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Gary Johnson, Buddy Roemer, Fred Karger- did I miss anyone else? Oh yes- Jon Huntsman? Whatever his name is- the guy who used to work for the President.
In other words, this is descending into a free for all. Trump wanted attention, but Huckabee bowing out opened this race wide open and there's any number of people who can emerge on top of this mess and at this point it's anyone's guess. Some of the heavyweights:
Newt: said something very interesting- the quote in question is as follows
This was in reference to GOP Superstar Paul Ryan's budget plan cutting Medicare especially hard and pretty much everyone of consequence within the Republican Party has spent every waking moment jumping up and down on Newt's head for it. But I LIKE THIS QUOTE! There is nothing fundamentally wrong with this quote and it's 100% a correct thing to say. The government should not be social engineering PERIOD. I don't care who does it- and radical change isn't necessarily a good thing.
I remember Newt as a whiny, well, kind of a dick from back in the day- but I give the man mad props for this. My personal yardstick of how to measure a candidate is not how much they attack the other party, but how much they're willing to stand up to their own party. You can jump up and down on the heads of your enemies with ease- but how many are willing to stand up to their friends? That's the really hard part.
Romney and his cash: he raised 10 million dollars in one day. That's awesome, but money doesn't equal a win. It helps, but he still passed a health care plan with an individual mandate and he's still a Mormon- that latter fact is a sad reflection on parts of the Republican Party, but it matters to a lot of them. I still don't think he's going to win.
Oddly enough, right now at this very second, Tim Pawlenty looks like the guy. He's a solid conservative, governed a very blue state for 2 terms and seems to be a pretty likeable guy. Only downside I can see is that he's going to have to struggle to get noticed a bit- but Iowa is right next door to Minnesota. He can visit us whenever he likes.
There are some big, gaping holes and questions that I expect will be answered by the end of the summer though. They are as follows:
1. What is Mitch Daniels going to do?
2. What is Sarah Palin going to do?
3. What is Michelle Bachmann going to do?
Daniels would make all the policy wonks in the room weak at the knees and he seems to have impressive ideas to bring to the table- which we need. Sarah Palin is a mystery, wrapped in a riddle, surrounded by an enigma- at this point I don't know if she'll run or if she does, what impact she'll have- which brings us to the third question: Michelle Bachmann.
I don't particularly like her, but if there's one potential candidate that could go sky high now that Huckabee is out, it's Bachmann. She's got solid social conservative credentials AND Tea Party crossover appeal which could be a potentially deadly combination in the race for the GOP Nomination. She does stick her foot in her mouth occasionally, but she's flown under the media radar for quite awhile so has yet to become as toxic as Sarah Palin is. Some people might argue Santorum could benefit as well, but I think he's been out of the game too long and you should Google him. Seriously. Do it. And you'll see what other problems he has.
My presumed top 3 at this point in time:
Bachmann
Gingrich
Daniels
...and not necessarily in that order.
Miss Cleo will see y'all in August. Have a great summer!
So where are we with this crazy Presidential Election coming up? Who's going where and who's doing what? The latest rundown:
Trump is out.
Huckabee is out.
Newt is in- but promptly pissed everyone off by saying this. More on that later.
Romney raised a shit-ton of money. More on that later too.
Bachmann continues her flirtation.
Ron Paul is in.
Also in the mix: Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Gary Johnson, Buddy Roemer, Fred Karger- did I miss anyone else? Oh yes- Jon Huntsman? Whatever his name is- the guy who used to work for the President.
In other words, this is descending into a free for all. Trump wanted attention, but Huckabee bowing out opened this race wide open and there's any number of people who can emerge on top of this mess and at this point it's anyone's guess. Some of the heavyweights:
Newt: said something very interesting- the quote in question is as follows
"I don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering," Gingrich said, calling the plan "too big a jump" for the country. "I don't think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate."
This was in reference to GOP Superstar Paul Ryan's budget plan cutting Medicare especially hard and pretty much everyone of consequence within the Republican Party has spent every waking moment jumping up and down on Newt's head for it. But I LIKE THIS QUOTE! There is nothing fundamentally wrong with this quote and it's 100% a correct thing to say. The government should not be social engineering PERIOD. I don't care who does it- and radical change isn't necessarily a good thing.
I remember Newt as a whiny, well, kind of a dick from back in the day- but I give the man mad props for this. My personal yardstick of how to measure a candidate is not how much they attack the other party, but how much they're willing to stand up to their own party. You can jump up and down on the heads of your enemies with ease- but how many are willing to stand up to their friends? That's the really hard part.
Romney and his cash: he raised 10 million dollars in one day. That's awesome, but money doesn't equal a win. It helps, but he still passed a health care plan with an individual mandate and he's still a Mormon- that latter fact is a sad reflection on parts of the Republican Party, but it matters to a lot of them. I still don't think he's going to win.
Oddly enough, right now at this very second, Tim Pawlenty looks like the guy. He's a solid conservative, governed a very blue state for 2 terms and seems to be a pretty likeable guy. Only downside I can see is that he's going to have to struggle to get noticed a bit- but Iowa is right next door to Minnesota. He can visit us whenever he likes.
There are some big, gaping holes and questions that I expect will be answered by the end of the summer though. They are as follows:
1. What is Mitch Daniels going to do?
2. What is Sarah Palin going to do?
3. What is Michelle Bachmann going to do?
Daniels would make all the policy wonks in the room weak at the knees and he seems to have impressive ideas to bring to the table- which we need. Sarah Palin is a mystery, wrapped in a riddle, surrounded by an enigma- at this point I don't know if she'll run or if she does, what impact she'll have- which brings us to the third question: Michelle Bachmann.
I don't particularly like her, but if there's one potential candidate that could go sky high now that Huckabee is out, it's Bachmann. She's got solid social conservative credentials AND Tea Party crossover appeal which could be a potentially deadly combination in the race for the GOP Nomination. She does stick her foot in her mouth occasionally, but she's flown under the media radar for quite awhile so has yet to become as toxic as Sarah Palin is. Some people might argue Santorum could benefit as well, but I think he's been out of the game too long and you should Google him. Seriously. Do it. And you'll see what other problems he has.
My presumed top 3 at this point in time:
Bachmann
Gingrich
Daniels
...and not necessarily in that order.
Miss Cleo will see y'all in August. Have a great summer!
Lib Dems In Disarray
Time to right the ship I think: the Lib Dems in Scotland have a new leader and he's talking about rediscovering his parties soul, but the electorate isn't so hot on the LibDems right now so some distance from the UK party may help, but how do you achieve that?
In London, Nick Clegg proposed an elected second chamber (what a shocking concept that is...) and was pretty much laughed out of the room.
I'm sure they'll get their shit together eventually, but for now, time to really get down to the nagging question of British politics: federalism or not? I think it's the logical conclusion that's fair to everyone. Right now Scotland gets free education courtesy of English taxpayers. Scottish MPs can vote on matters pertaining to England but English MPs are no longer allowed to vote on matters pertaining to Scotland because they've been devolved to the Scottish Parliament. That situation may be fine and dandy for the Scots, but it's grossly unfair to the English- and a relationship that unequal and unbalanced is doomed to implode.
So right the ship: Westminster, by all accounts is little more than a glorified echo chamber- everybody who knows anything about British politics knows that the real work is done on the local level- making a true, national government and giving the English their own Parliament would complete the process left unfinished by Blair.
In London, Nick Clegg proposed an elected second chamber (what a shocking concept that is...) and was pretty much laughed out of the room.
I'm sure they'll get their shit together eventually, but for now, time to really get down to the nagging question of British politics: federalism or not? I think it's the logical conclusion that's fair to everyone. Right now Scotland gets free education courtesy of English taxpayers. Scottish MPs can vote on matters pertaining to England but English MPs are no longer allowed to vote on matters pertaining to Scotland because they've been devolved to the Scottish Parliament. That situation may be fine and dandy for the Scots, but it's grossly unfair to the English- and a relationship that unequal and unbalanced is doomed to implode.
So right the ship: Westminster, by all accounts is little more than a glorified echo chamber- everybody who knows anything about British politics knows that the real work is done on the local level- making a true, national government and giving the English their own Parliament would complete the process left unfinished by Blair.
The Queen Goes To Ireland
Queen Elizabeth II is in Ireland today, marking the first time in a century that a British Monarch has visited that country and the first time since the Irish Republic achieved independence that a British Monarch has been in the country. She laid a wreath at the Garden of Rememberance in Dublin and will be in the country for the next few days doing various, well, Queenly things.
I cautiously approve of this. It has the real potential to be a huge crowning achievement for the Queen- the prospect of a final reconciliation with Ireland and healing some very long festering wounds between Britain and Ireland. A casual glance at the history of both nations reveals that there's a lot of bad blood that goes back centuries and I'm sure some in Ireland won't be happy until full unity has been achieved, but I think this has the potential to be an important symbol and could do some real good for British-Irish relations.
I cautiously approve of this. It has the real potential to be a huge crowning achievement for the Queen- the prospect of a final reconciliation with Ireland and healing some very long festering wounds between Britain and Ireland. A casual glance at the history of both nations reveals that there's a lot of bad blood that goes back centuries and I'm sure some in Ireland won't be happy until full unity has been achieved, but I think this has the potential to be an important symbol and could do some real good for British-Irish relations.
What Did We Expect?
This is what happens when you let 10 years of gentrification and selling out to big name developers go completely unchecked: The City Council loses it's mind and sets out to destroy the character of downtown itself.
I have to wonder just what happened to Iowa City. I remember growing up with Great Midwestern Ice Cream, Bushnell's Turtle, Barbara's Bakery- all locally owned small business that rubbed shoulders with bars, restaurants and yes, actually honest-to-god retail that people in the community wanted to come and shop at. The ongoing trainwreck downtown began with the opening of the Coral Ridge Mall and hasn't stopped since.
I can understand the calculus: there was no way Iowa City could compete with the largest mall in Iowa- at least it was at the time. There was bound to be a hit on the retail in downtown Iowa City- but swinging upscale, which seems to be the strategy that's been pursued for a decade or more essentially destroyed the character of downtown. We want a mix. We want good restaurants, good locally owned business, good bars and yes, good retail- retail that students AND members of the community as a whole are going to want to shop at. That's the formula for success downtown.
But how do you reverse the damage done over the course of the past ten years? That is the harder question. All the new property downtown has meant that property values and therefore rents have shot through the roof. Attracting retail chains will be difficult or next to impossible, because who wants to invest in an absurdly expensive graveyard of a downtown? As it stands now, even the boutiques are struggling. Bars rule the roost, because they can bring in the cash and afford downtown.
We need a vision and someone advocating for a real vision for downtown. No more bullshit studies or pretty pictures- we need to step up and actually do it. We need tax breaks, incentives, lowering property taxes any combination to get the job done right. If downtown is to prosper, it needs to try and find that balance that made downtown Iowa City such a unique place to shop to begin with.
So now, no more homeless people to offend the rich and powerful. And no more non-profits to offend the rich and powerful. And more restrictions on vendors along Melrose during game days because that offends the rich and powerful who were silly enough to buy a house right next to a 70,000 seat stadium.
I'm neither rich nor particularly powerful- but this craven retreat in the face of the petulent demands of the people responsible for ruining downtown Iowa City needs to stop. We need to stand up to gentrification and start working to revitalize our downtown- because, despite what people think, we're not an exclusively upper-class town and we should stop catering to the tiny minority that think the University should get rid of all the students and that football is for chauvinist pigs and that downtown just needs the right posh, faaaawcny restaurants and bars where only the 'right sort of people' can drink and buy the right sort of extremely expensive clothes and park their fancy cars.
Somebody needs to speak for the community. We need a downtown that's going to serve the entire community and not just be a playground for the rich and powerful.
I have to wonder just what happened to Iowa City. I remember growing up with Great Midwestern Ice Cream, Bushnell's Turtle, Barbara's Bakery- all locally owned small business that rubbed shoulders with bars, restaurants and yes, actually honest-to-god retail that people in the community wanted to come and shop at. The ongoing trainwreck downtown began with the opening of the Coral Ridge Mall and hasn't stopped since.
I can understand the calculus: there was no way Iowa City could compete with the largest mall in Iowa- at least it was at the time. There was bound to be a hit on the retail in downtown Iowa City- but swinging upscale, which seems to be the strategy that's been pursued for a decade or more essentially destroyed the character of downtown. We want a mix. We want good restaurants, good locally owned business, good bars and yes, good retail- retail that students AND members of the community as a whole are going to want to shop at. That's the formula for success downtown.
But how do you reverse the damage done over the course of the past ten years? That is the harder question. All the new property downtown has meant that property values and therefore rents have shot through the roof. Attracting retail chains will be difficult or next to impossible, because who wants to invest in an absurdly expensive graveyard of a downtown? As it stands now, even the boutiques are struggling. Bars rule the roost, because they can bring in the cash and afford downtown.
We need a vision and someone advocating for a real vision for downtown. No more bullshit studies or pretty pictures- we need to step up and actually do it. We need tax breaks, incentives, lowering property taxes any combination to get the job done right. If downtown is to prosper, it needs to try and find that balance that made downtown Iowa City such a unique place to shop to begin with.
So now, no more homeless people to offend the rich and powerful. And no more non-profits to offend the rich and powerful. And more restrictions on vendors along Melrose during game days because that offends the rich and powerful who were silly enough to buy a house right next to a 70,000 seat stadium.
I'm neither rich nor particularly powerful- but this craven retreat in the face of the petulent demands of the people responsible for ruining downtown Iowa City needs to stop. We need to stand up to gentrification and start working to revitalize our downtown- because, despite what people think, we're not an exclusively upper-class town and we should stop catering to the tiny minority that think the University should get rid of all the students and that football is for chauvinist pigs and that downtown just needs the right posh, faaaawcny restaurants and bars where only the 'right sort of people' can drink and buy the right sort of extremely expensive clothes and park their fancy cars.
Somebody needs to speak for the community. We need a downtown that's going to serve the entire community and not just be a playground for the rich and powerful.
Lighten Up Graduation? Yes, please!
A University Student was arrested at CLAS Graduation for throwing toilet paper into the crowd in an attempt to 'lighten up' graduation... Why toilet paper?
That last quote is real money, in my book... there is so much bullshit in higher education that needs to be scrubbed out- and I expect the next ten years is going to see a lot of evolution and change come to higher ed.
Special bonus at the link: video!!
One thing is for sure: graduation does need to be lightened up a bit. I attended the Graduate College ceremony on Saturday and it had all the appeal of a funeral wake. The music prior to the ceremony was dreary and depressing. Pomp and Circumstance was dull and unappealing. Everything was so 'big stick in the butt' pompous and solemn- and no doubt, a little bit of decorum is called for- a lot of people had worked hard for their pieces of paper and deserve to have the ceremony taken seriously. But it's also a celebration- and to that end, I have a small suggestion to change the tone a bit:
Bring on the Pep Band.
Seriously- they can get the crowd pumped up, have a little bit of fun and they can play Pomp and Circumstance when the ceremony is ready to get going. The Pep Band... and better speakers! That should do the trick.
Reached by phone Monday, Koehler, who was not graduating Saturday, explained that he chose to throw toilet paper because of its resemblance to streamers, which he thought would bring a celebratory feel to the ceremony. Also, he said the toilet paper represented students wiping their backsides on "all of the misconstrued requirements of institutionalized education in our country."
That last quote is real money, in my book... there is so much bullshit in higher education that needs to be scrubbed out- and I expect the next ten years is going to see a lot of evolution and change come to higher ed.
Special bonus at the link: video!!
One thing is for sure: graduation does need to be lightened up a bit. I attended the Graduate College ceremony on Saturday and it had all the appeal of a funeral wake. The music prior to the ceremony was dreary and depressing. Pomp and Circumstance was dull and unappealing. Everything was so 'big stick in the butt' pompous and solemn- and no doubt, a little bit of decorum is called for- a lot of people had worked hard for their pieces of paper and deserve to have the ceremony taken seriously. But it's also a celebration- and to that end, I have a small suggestion to change the tone a bit:
Bring on the Pep Band.
Seriously- they can get the crowd pumped up, have a little bit of fun and they can play Pomp and Circumstance when the ceremony is ready to get going. The Pep Band... and better speakers! That should do the trick.
So The World...
...is supposed to end on the 21st. Around 6 PM. But 6 PM, when? What time zone?
Slate dug up some answers, for those curious...
Slate dug up some answers, for those curious...
Harmon Killebrew 1936-2011
The Minnesota Twins lost a titan today and the sport of baseball lost a true star, as one of the all time greats Harmon Killebrew passed away after a long battle with cancer.
Living in Minnesota, you realize quickly that Twins baseball is more than just a team, it's practically a state religion. People may still cling to the memory of the North Stars and roll their eyes about the woes of the Vikings or the Wild or the Timberwolves but everybody and I do mean everybody loves the Twins. I remember working security at one of the high schools in Mankato and the entire school ground to a halt and every television seemed to be on watching the Twins play the Athletics in the playoffs- when I was in high school, two things halted everything and glued everyone to the television: first was the OJ Verdict (sad, I know) and the second was the Florida Recount. Stopping everything for a baseball game just showed how seriously residents of the Medium White North take their baseball.
Killebrew was a titan of the game and an incredibly humble man to boot. He'll be missed.
(Going to see a Twins game just moved up the Bucket List)
Living in Minnesota, you realize quickly that Twins baseball is more than just a team, it's practically a state religion. People may still cling to the memory of the North Stars and roll their eyes about the woes of the Vikings or the Wild or the Timberwolves but everybody and I do mean everybody loves the Twins. I remember working security at one of the high schools in Mankato and the entire school ground to a halt and every television seemed to be on watching the Twins play the Athletics in the playoffs- when I was in high school, two things halted everything and glued everyone to the television: first was the OJ Verdict (sad, I know) and the second was the Florida Recount. Stopping everything for a baseball game just showed how seriously residents of the Medium White North take their baseball.
Killebrew was a titan of the game and an incredibly humble man to boot. He'll be missed.
(Going to see a Twins game just moved up the Bucket List)
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Huck-a-be-not
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is not running for President in 2012. He made the announcement last night at the end of his show on Fox News and kids, it might have been the smartest thing he has ever done.
It's no secret that Republicans in Iowa tend to be more of the social conservative variety than any other flavor of Republican and Huckabee would have commanded large amounts of their support. By staying out, he throws a lot of the social conservative votes probably towards Michelle Bachmann more than anything else- but that's assuming she runs. If not, then the social conservative vote could be split between any number of candidates.
It's a brilliant move, really, because in one fell swoop, Huckabee broke the GOP race wide open.
With Gingrich in the race, we've got a genuine policy heavyweight in the ring. If Mitch Daniels runs- then we'll have two. And maybe, just maybe, a genuine debate about what policies will be good for the country as a posed to the tiresome red v blue, culture war meme that some GOP candidates like to wallow in when they run for President.
This race is getting interesting...
It's no secret that Republicans in Iowa tend to be more of the social conservative variety than any other flavor of Republican and Huckabee would have commanded large amounts of their support. By staying out, he throws a lot of the social conservative votes probably towards Michelle Bachmann more than anything else- but that's assuming she runs. If not, then the social conservative vote could be split between any number of candidates.
It's a brilliant move, really, because in one fell swoop, Huckabee broke the GOP race wide open.
With Gingrich in the race, we've got a genuine policy heavyweight in the ring. If Mitch Daniels runs- then we'll have two. And maybe, just maybe, a genuine debate about what policies will be good for the country as a posed to the tiresome red v blue, culture war meme that some GOP candidates like to wallow in when they run for President.
This race is getting interesting...
Saturday, May 14, 2011
How Do You Say 'Glass Ceiling' In Bengali?
State Elections in India have seen more women sweep to power- Mamata Banerjee and the All India Trinamool Congress ousted the Communist Party after 35 years of rule in West Bengal and Jayalalithaa took power in the Indian State of Tamil Nadu. This isn't really all that unusual for India- Sonia Gandhi is the most powerful person in the ruling Congress Party, Sheila Dikshit runs the capitol of New Delhi, Mayawati runs Uttar Pradesh and Pratibha Patil is currently the (largely ceremonial) President of India.
Usually a lot of these women come from political families or dynasties which isn't that uncommon throughout the region. However, what I argued in my MA thesis was that the rise to power of a lot of these women cannot be solely attributed to mere dynastic politics- which is what a lot of political scientists tend to brush this phenomenon off as. Mayawati is one example of an outsider- and now Mamata Banerjee is another. And even if you look closely at a lot of these women- their supposed rise to power through dynastic politics or the widow's mandate is nowhere near as clear-cut as political science would have us believe.
(Note to America: Mamata Banerjee and her party will now be running a state with 90 million people in it. I think it's time to elect a woman President, don't you? Further note to Iowa: let's elect Christie Vilsack to Congress, too. Time to shatter that glass ceiling as well.)
Usually a lot of these women come from political families or dynasties which isn't that uncommon throughout the region. However, what I argued in my MA thesis was that the rise to power of a lot of these women cannot be solely attributed to mere dynastic politics- which is what a lot of political scientists tend to brush this phenomenon off as. Mayawati is one example of an outsider- and now Mamata Banerjee is another. And even if you look closely at a lot of these women- their supposed rise to power through dynastic politics or the widow's mandate is nowhere near as clear-cut as political science would have us believe.
(Note to America: Mamata Banerjee and her party will now be running a state with 90 million people in it. I think it's time to elect a woman President, don't you? Further note to Iowa: let's elect Christie Vilsack to Congress, too. Time to shatter that glass ceiling as well.)
Game On
The Medium White North is all aflutter because finally, the long simmering question about the fate of the Minnesota Vikings is starting to actually gain some traction and move forward. They need a new Stadium- badly- but Minnesot-ah politicians aren't that eager about doling out huge amounts of money when they're trying to tackle an equally large budget deficit up there. Minneapolis floated a weak plan to build a new stadium on the existing Metrodome site. (I like it- it's cheap, the infrastructure is all there, plus it justifies a very expensive light rail project they're going to be slamming through downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul in the next couple of years.) But then Ramsey County (St. Paul) got in on the action by pointing out there was a former US Army Munitions plant up the road a bit in Arden Hills that they were looking for something to do with. The Vikings got interested in a big hurry and things started to move...
Problem is, the politicians don't like the costs of upgrading the roads around there and I think that, ultimately, is why Minneapolis is going to get its shit together and get a deal done. Costs would be cheaper and the infrastructure is all right there.
Which brings us back to the sticky equation of building stadiums with public money. Granted the Vikes are going to pick up a hefty chunk of the tab- but not all of it. At the end of the day, I don't like using public money for Stadiums- but you have to accept it as inevitable. You either spend cash now or the team leaves (probably to Los Angeles) and then you have to spend MORE money getting a team back once you realize how much a pro sports franchise can bring to any given local economy. I don't know the actual numbers on that, but that's my impression on how this show works- also why I'm cheering on the players over the owners in the NFL's current labor dispute.
Problem is, the politicians don't like the costs of upgrading the roads around there and I think that, ultimately, is why Minneapolis is going to get its shit together and get a deal done. Costs would be cheaper and the infrastructure is all right there.
Which brings us back to the sticky equation of building stadiums with public money. Granted the Vikes are going to pick up a hefty chunk of the tab- but not all of it. At the end of the day, I don't like using public money for Stadiums- but you have to accept it as inevitable. You either spend cash now or the team leaves (probably to Los Angeles) and then you have to spend MORE money getting a team back once you realize how much a pro sports franchise can bring to any given local economy. I don't know the actual numbers on that, but that's my impression on how this show works- also why I'm cheering on the players over the owners in the NFL's current labor dispute.
Dear Mr. President...
Awesome job killing Bin Laden. Now, about Libya: RECOGNIZE THE REBELS ALREADY!
Jesus Monkey Balls this administration is pissing me off. Whether you agree or disagree with the 'kinetic military action' (the White House seriously called it that) we've got going in NATO, I think we can all get behind the idea that we need to actually get a coherent strategy together. It's frustrating as hell, because in the space of a week, the Obama Administration flung it's not inconsiderable weight behind the British and the French to get a UN Resolution AND managed to get Russia and China to hold their vetos to get this 'kinetic military action' off the ground. We bombed for a week and then President Obama seemed to say 'all right, biatches, I'm out.'
And now our policy is a mess as a result. They don't want ground troops and neither do we- so give them recognition. Give them aid, give them weapons. We may not have a direct strategic interest in Libya, but a world without Qadaffi is a world we want to be in. Let's get this thing done already.
Jesus Monkey Balls this administration is pissing me off. Whether you agree or disagree with the 'kinetic military action' (the White House seriously called it that) we've got going in NATO, I think we can all get behind the idea that we need to actually get a coherent strategy together. It's frustrating as hell, because in the space of a week, the Obama Administration flung it's not inconsiderable weight behind the British and the French to get a UN Resolution AND managed to get Russia and China to hold their vetos to get this 'kinetic military action' off the ground. We bombed for a week and then President Obama seemed to say 'all right, biatches, I'm out.'
And now our policy is a mess as a result. They don't want ground troops and neither do we- so give them recognition. Give them aid, give them weapons. We may not have a direct strategic interest in Libya, but a world without Qadaffi is a world we want to be in. Let's get this thing done already.
Hmmm... Singapore.
Isn't it so much fun when other countries have elections? Case in point: tiny, uptight island state Singapore had elections about a week ago and now founding father Lee Quan Yew is stepping down as Senior Mentor Figure or whatever he is following his party's worst election result since 1965.
OK... so stay with me here: worst election result since 1965. Just what kind of a drubbing do you think that involves? Seriously- that sounds like a political jackhammer to the colon, right? A really bad visit to the political proctologist?
Well it turns out that the ruling People's Action Party saw their share of the vote drop to a staggeringly low... 60%. Seriously. And the opposition Worker's Party reached an all time high in representation in Singapore's parliament after it managed to win... 6 seats.
If that's a crappy election result, I really, really, really hope I'm around to see the Worker's Party take power. That will be AWESOME. I think heads will literally explode...
OK... so stay with me here: worst election result since 1965. Just what kind of a drubbing do you think that involves? Seriously- that sounds like a political jackhammer to the colon, right? A really bad visit to the political proctologist?
Well it turns out that the ruling People's Action Party saw their share of the vote drop to a staggeringly low... 60%. Seriously. And the opposition Worker's Party reached an all time high in representation in Singapore's parliament after it managed to win... 6 seats.
If that's a crappy election result, I really, really, really hope I'm around to see the Worker's Party take power. That will be AWESOME. I think heads will literally explode...
Friday, May 13, 2011
Bookshot #22: Fear And Loathing- On The Campaign Trail '72
I went through this book like a buzzsaw through a piece of wood. It helps that I love Hunter S. Thompson to begin with- I love his style, his meandering prose, his blending and blurring of fact and fiction, his general drug-taking, booze drinking hedonistic lifestyle that just seems like a hurricane of insane... fun. Not that I'm saying I'd be OK with taking large amounts of narcotics these days, but had I been around back in the 70s, I have a feeling I would have been growing long, shaggy, 'Dazed and Confused' like hair and smoking copious amounts of ganja. I mean, what else was there to do in the 70s?
But, back to the book: basically Thompson hit the campaign trail and followed South Dakota Senator George McGovern through the long, arduous slog of the Democratic Primaries through the convention in Miami and all the way to an epic beatdown at the hands of Richard Nixon- who was re-elected and then promptly impaled himself on the Watergate Scandal two years later. Looking at the bulk of Thompson's analysis, it seems that McGovern ran initially as an anti-establishment politician a sort of anti-politician Washington outsider who gained a lot of strength in the early primaries because people brought into the notion that he could actually affect real change in the country. (Weird how history repeats itself, isn't it- sounds a lot like our current President, doesn't it?)
Unfortunately, that image was shattered by the Democratic National Convention in Miami. McGovern went into with a problem: he had won by beating up the party establishment, unfortunately, the perception was that he couldn't win without their support. This perception turned out to be correct in the end, because Humphrey-Muskie-Daley-Party Bosses crowd essentially sat on their hands and didn't lift a finger to help McGovern. There was a further contradiction to be found here, because by seeking the support of the party old guard, McGovern destroyed his image as a Washington outsider, anti-establishment politician- after that people just saw him as a typical politician. Throw in the fact that Convention floor wrangling meant that he delivered his acceptance speech at 3 AM and that he picked an establishment Senator, Tom Eagleton of Missouri as his running mate who had been hospitalized for depression and undergone shock therapy treatment imploded in his face and Eagleton had to be replaced on the ticket.
Pretty much, McGovern looked like he might have something going up until the '72 Convention and then it all fell apart- in a big hurry and in a big way.
Thompson brings his usual mania to the proceedings and if there was one thing that I was curious about during the reading of this book, it was just how much of it was true and how much of it was completely made up- by the author. I know the rumor that candidate Ed Muskie was on ibogaine actually got some play in the press during the campaign- and it was also totally and utterly made up. Whether Thompson did give his press credentials to a friend of a friend who got wasted off his ass and caused chaos on Muskie's somewhat boring whistlestop train tour of Florida are questions that might be worthy of greater investigation. I don't think it matters really... Thompson makes it interesting. Whether you want to call this non-fiction, total fiction, weird memoir or some kind of metafiction I think it ranks as probably the most interesting, informative, ultimately revealing portrait of a modern presidential campaign that I've ever read.
Overall: Not as good as 'Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas'- though what could be? Dr. Gonzo turns his manic gaze upon the down and dirty world of Presidential politics and produces a wild, wonderful journey through the 1972 campaign. A must have for any true political junkie. Like me.
Monday, May 9, 2011
'Thor'-- A Review
The summer of the SuperHero kicked off in fine fashion last night with the debut of Thor on the silver screen and this movie was a truly pleasant surprise and an overall extremely excellent movie. Best surprise I've had all year.
Basically, arrogant, brash Thor (played perfectly by Chris Hemsworth) defies his one-eyed father Odin (played by Anthony Hopkins) and risks war by storming into the realm of the Frost Giants demanding satisfaction after they disrupt the day when he was going to be named heir to his father's throne. For his foolishness he gets stripped of his powers and banished to Earth to be taught a long overdue (from his Dad's point of view anyway) lesson in humility.
Physicist Jane Foster (played nicely by Natalie Portman) hits him with her van and the usual hijinks ensue. Thor and Foster develop a love connection- the mere mortals figure out that there's more to the big hulking Scandanavian than meets the eye and eventually, as you'd expect, Thor learns his lesson, gets his mojo back and saves the day.
(Meanwhile back in Asgard, trickster brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) manuevers his way into power and starts causing trouble and threatening to destroy pretty much everything- becoming Thor's enemy in the process and eventually getting his butt kicked by our hammer-wielding hero.)
On the face that brief synopsis, you'd think it'd be just another run of the mill second tier superhero movie that appeals only to comic book fanatics and not much else, but I think having Kenneth Branaugh direct this film was a touch of pure genius. Branaugh has a good sense of how to tease the big, bombastic, Shakespearean moments out of the scenes in Asgard and found the right cast to pull it off, but he also doesn't try and overburden the Earth parts of the story with too much plot. Yes, it is an origins story and yes, once Thor gets to Earth, there's a certain amount of 'fish out of water' going on, but it's understated. The character developments feel real- the romantic connection doesn't feel forced and Branaugh took a second tier superhero and gave him one helluva movie to shine in.
And the cast was key to that- Anthony Hopkins as Odin? Awesome, if a little reminiscent of Jor-El in the Superman movies. Chris Hemsworth? Perfect balance between arrogance and humility and gave real depth to a character that could have been exceedingly one night. Natalie Portman? She looks happy just to be eating cheeseburgers again after Black Swan. Idris Elba as Heimdal the Gatekeeper shines- and even Rene Russo shows up as Thor's Mother. I mean, Rene Russo? How awesome is it to see her again? Pretty damn awesome!
Of course, the build-up to next year's Avengers movie continues, with a teaser scene post credits and Jeremy Renner making an appearance as Hawkeye (who is from Waverly, Iowa... awesome) and I have to say that Thor pushed the bar that much higher- not just for Captain America, but for the Avengers movie itself. Hopefully it can live up to the hype.
Overall: An excellent movie- mythology, science fiction, superheroes all blending together in a nice complete very enjoyable movie. perfect start to the summer movie season. We'll see if Captain America can measure up.
Basically, arrogant, brash Thor (played perfectly by Chris Hemsworth) defies his one-eyed father Odin (played by Anthony Hopkins) and risks war by storming into the realm of the Frost Giants demanding satisfaction after they disrupt the day when he was going to be named heir to his father's throne. For his foolishness he gets stripped of his powers and banished to Earth to be taught a long overdue (from his Dad's point of view anyway) lesson in humility.
Physicist Jane Foster (played nicely by Natalie Portman) hits him with her van and the usual hijinks ensue. Thor and Foster develop a love connection- the mere mortals figure out that there's more to the big hulking Scandanavian than meets the eye and eventually, as you'd expect, Thor learns his lesson, gets his mojo back and saves the day.
(Meanwhile back in Asgard, trickster brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) manuevers his way into power and starts causing trouble and threatening to destroy pretty much everything- becoming Thor's enemy in the process and eventually getting his butt kicked by our hammer-wielding hero.)
On the face that brief synopsis, you'd think it'd be just another run of the mill second tier superhero movie that appeals only to comic book fanatics and not much else, but I think having Kenneth Branaugh direct this film was a touch of pure genius. Branaugh has a good sense of how to tease the big, bombastic, Shakespearean moments out of the scenes in Asgard and found the right cast to pull it off, but he also doesn't try and overburden the Earth parts of the story with too much plot. Yes, it is an origins story and yes, once Thor gets to Earth, there's a certain amount of 'fish out of water' going on, but it's understated. The character developments feel real- the romantic connection doesn't feel forced and Branaugh took a second tier superhero and gave him one helluva movie to shine in.
And the cast was key to that- Anthony Hopkins as Odin? Awesome, if a little reminiscent of Jor-El in the Superman movies. Chris Hemsworth? Perfect balance between arrogance and humility and gave real depth to a character that could have been exceedingly one night. Natalie Portman? She looks happy just to be eating cheeseburgers again after Black Swan. Idris Elba as Heimdal the Gatekeeper shines- and even Rene Russo shows up as Thor's Mother. I mean, Rene Russo? How awesome is it to see her again? Pretty damn awesome!
Of course, the build-up to next year's Avengers movie continues, with a teaser scene post credits and Jeremy Renner making an appearance as Hawkeye (who is from Waverly, Iowa... awesome) and I have to say that Thor pushed the bar that much higher- not just for Captain America, but for the Avengers movie itself. Hopefully it can live up to the hype.
Overall: An excellent movie- mythology, science fiction, superheroes all blending together in a nice complete very enjoyable movie. perfect start to the summer movie season. We'll see if Captain America can measure up.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Bookshot #21: Radicals For Capitalism
This book was something of a disappointment to me, but I think you had to kind of expect that. The Libertarian Movement- if there is such a thing that can encompass one, overarching label is so big, so wide, so varied that it would be next to impossible to do half of it justice, much less complete with author Brian Doherty labels a 'Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement.'
Politically, this didn't do much for me. I think I'll flirt with Libertarians on certain issues, but I don't think I'll be persuaded to jump fully onboard. They're sort of like benign communists, some wanting to do away with the state entirely in the anarcho-capitalist vein while others want to minimize it as much as possible. And therein lies my biggest problem with this book: lack of concrete policies that have a hope in hell of being enacted in the real world. Libertarianism seems to long on theory and very short on practice.
But give Doherty credit: he builds a lengthy, complete history of all the major players in the modern Libertarian movement from Ayn Rand to Murray Rothbard to Milton Friedman, Hayek, Mises- there is no stone left unturned and Doherty takes pains to explain to the reader just how exactly each individual impacted the development of the modern movement. Unfortunately in the case of Hayek and Mises, this requires slogging through a seriously long Chapter on the Austrian School of Economics before you get back into more interesting things- but every person is important, even the economists.
If Doherty falls down occasionally in my book, it might be due to the fact that he's right smack dab in the thick of the movement he's trying to chronicle. There's a faint sheen of hagiography that sometimes pops out at you and occasional bouts of excited hero worship leap off the page all of which left me wondering just how on the level some of his descriptions and accounts were and if this really was a true, objective look at the Libertarian movement. That said, I can't imagine there'd be too many other scholars out there willing to take this on, so at the end of the day, more power to him. He did a damn fine job, if I do say so myself.
Some interesting tidbits I came away with: Ayn Rand is... well, I don't know if she's crazy, but damn is objectivism is weird as all git out. I tended to view Rand as a somewhat strange author- the worlds she created in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead struck me as cold, hard, selfish world's with no room for any trace of compassion- which turns out is exactly what she was getting at. The Libertarian movement at the time took the tack that if you just educated enough people to the benefits of free market, they'd get it and it'd all be hunky dory. Rand disagreed with that pointing out that as long as human beings were altruistic that could never happen, so people had to learn the virtues of being selfish.
Is that not completely crazy?
There's more- for instance, I didn't know Howard Stern ran on the Libertarian Ticket for Governor of New York back in the early 90s. I didn't know about people who retreated back to the land to escape the oppressive state- including living literally in the forest. Or people that were crazy about gold. Or people that think psychology is a crime because it deprives insane people of their basic right to liberty.
Or this, that or the other thing... no doubt, this was an incredibly informative book, packed to the gills with knowledge that I genuinely didn't know- so learning new things is always a delight, so I liked that aspect of it, but I still have my doubts about Libertarianism- this book didn't make me a convert. In a capitalist world where mass production devalues quality in the favor of quantity, consumers have less power to move the market. Wal-Mart won't care if people buy crap at Target. They make enough of it to absorb any loss... so I have serious questions. And the upshot of it is that I think I'll have to sit down and try and tackle Friedrich Hayek.
Economics. You bastards.
Overall: Good, informative, thought-provoking, this book ultimately didn't make a believer out of me. Maybe that wasn't its intention, but I remain unconvinced.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Late Night Chronicles 84: Nick Clegg's No Good, Horrible, Very Bad Week
Published on Facebook today..
I heard the latest rundown on the British local elections that occured earlier this past week straight from the mouth of the Beeb itself as I sped away from Camp Dodge on Friday towards West Des Moines and Trader Joe's for a quick stint of shopping before rushing home as quick as I could.
I winced. And then I gasped. Clegg and his home-peeps had been taken to the woodshed. More than that, it was as if the British electorate had picked up the Liberal Democrats by the scruff of the neck, dragged them into the garden and laid into them with a length of rubber hose. It wasn't your regular electoral drubbing, oh no- that they would have been happy with. This was the beatdown to end all beatdowns and the sad part about it is that they seem to have jumped directly out of the frying pan and right into the fire.
What a pity. I've always had a soft spot for third political parties that actually work and win seats and get somewhere, so the Liberal Democrats have always been a favorite of mine. How I wish America would get a third political party- it doesn't even have to be anything so exciting as the Liberal Democrats, Social Democrats, New Democrats (see Canada)- just one more party. It doesn't have to win everything, it just has to be there and have a voice in the debate so we all don't experience the joyful feeling of walking into the voting booth every couple of years and thinking 'damn, I need these two parties like I need a colonoscopy with no lube.' Yeah, it's that painful.
But I digress: it was interesting as the blessedly short British electoral cycle kicked into gear last year- in fact, I couldn't wait, because, for the first time ever, it was going to feature a live, televised debate between the leaders of all three major parties. I had a tickle in the back of my oxipital about this. The LibDems have had to fight for press attention and coverage every single electoral cycle and with the right leader saying the right things they could break the election wide open- it'd be Kennedy-Nixon all over again, only without the annoying family baggage and Marilyn Monroe floating around in the background.
And wouldn't you know it? I was right. Clegg-o was telegenic, talked sense and looked a helluva lot better than dear old dour Gordon Brown and slick Davey Cameron, he of the repackaged Old Boy's Club and for a couple of weeks it looked as though for one tantalizing moment that the LibDems might have something going. But then Labour and the Tories played catch-up in a big way. Cameron went out of his way to prove that he wasn't Margaret Thatcher in a man suit and when the dust cleared, no one had overall control.
Here's where I've got to give Clegg credit: the man has balls. Big, solid, steel balls. Because he took the biggest political risk any politician anywhere has ever taken in at least twenty years- and if it worked, it was going to reap his party benefits that they had spent nearly a century dreaming about and if it didn't- it was going to look like a four car pile-up on the Interstate at rush hour: not pretty. He had a hard choice. He could have let Labour back in, in which case, he would have been knifed by the electorate anyway. He could have done nothing and let Cameron sputter around with a minority government for awhile- which could have seen him knifed by the electorate if the economy would have gone south in a major way. Or he could swing for the fences.
And that's what he did. He sold his nominally left of center party on a coalition with the Conservatives, said it was right, responsible and demanded as a price what Liberal Democrats had been dreaming of: a vote on voting reform. The idea was, from what I could tell that Clegg and His Home Peeps would act as a calming influence on the rabid tendencies of the Conservatives. Don't want a return the lunatic eurosceptic Thatcherite right wing, he said, put us in there! And that's what they did.
Only it didn't really work out that way. The Conservatives made it clear that they were in charge and that the LibDems were the junior partner and hung their partners out to dry on the massive rise in UK Student Fees which would allow Universities to charge up to $18,000 a year- riots ensued, people were pissed off and it was a massive LibDem walk back as Clegg had promised to hold the line on student fees. People were pissed. People remembered and Clegg's gloriously insane gamble exploded in his face.
(As a side note: if there were riots in the United States everytime Universities raised tuition, there'd be no Universities left. They would all be smoking holes in the ground. Disaffected, apathetic college students take note: you're being hosed!)
But it's worse than that: the voting reform referendum got spanked. Hard. Clegg came closer than any Liberal leader ever had and was rebuffed. The Conservatives didn't help by pretty much running against their coalition partners on this one- Cameron's strategy apparently is to use the LibDems as a bomb shelter to cover his ass from all the budget cutting he's going to have to do in the name of economic austerity. If there's any comfort for the LibDems at the end of this godawful week, it's that Cameron's strategy seems to have blown up in his face as well. By not buttressing the LibDem vote even the slightest bit and just letting them swing, he wrought a whole new Constitutional problem in Scotland, where the LibDems collapsed in a heap (as they apparently did nationwide) and Labour still hasn't pulled it's head of its ass and the Scottish Nationalist Party came waltzing into sole control of the Scottish Parliament.
Ooops. Latest polls from over there show that maybe 1/3rd of Scots are in favor of independence- but SNP Leader Alex Salmond is playing it cool, pushing for a referendum not now, but in 2014 at the earliest, when he might have made enough of a case for independence to get a win.
Cameron and the Tories have made a hash of this, exposing the coalition for what it was all along, not a coalition, but a marriage of convinience- which has suddenly become quite inconvinient for the LibDems. It may not happen now, it may not happen two months from now, but I'm betting Britain will be heading for the polls by year's end if not sooner. The LibDems were hung out to dry by their supposed coalition partners and they need to get the knifings over with, get some distances from this mess and start picking up the pieces as soon as they possibly can.
Hard to blame Clegg though. I can't say I can think of any other LibDem leader that would have passed up the opportunity to get a shot at a referendum on voting reform- problem is though that if you sell people on the idea that you can control the crazy Tories, you've actually got to be able to do that. He didn't and the biggest political gamble of all time exploded as a result.
Again though, Cameron and the Tories reap what they sow. They hung the LibDems out to dry, perhaps operating under the assumption that the Conservative Party would somehow make inroads in Scotland- which was beyond foolish. The Labour Landslide of 1997 wiped them out and the Scots remember nearly two decades of right-wing foolishness in Britain. They're not going blue anytime soon, if ever. It might have seemed like good politics at the time, but standing by while the LibDems got knifed and left for dead means that Prime Minister Cameron and all his merry men now have the looming prospect of a Scottish Independence vote to deal with and all the Constitutional messiness that will entail.
In other words, they've jumped straight from the frying pan directly into the fire. If I was Clegg and the LibDems, I'd cut your losses and return the favor. Hang Cameron and the Boys out to dry and see how they tackle the new reality. If nothing else, Britain would then really know what kind of a government they've got.
And, after all, turnabout is fair play.
I heard the latest rundown on the British local elections that occured earlier this past week straight from the mouth of the Beeb itself as I sped away from Camp Dodge on Friday towards West Des Moines and Trader Joe's for a quick stint of shopping before rushing home as quick as I could.
I winced. And then I gasped. Clegg and his home-peeps had been taken to the woodshed. More than that, it was as if the British electorate had picked up the Liberal Democrats by the scruff of the neck, dragged them into the garden and laid into them with a length of rubber hose. It wasn't your regular electoral drubbing, oh no- that they would have been happy with. This was the beatdown to end all beatdowns and the sad part about it is that they seem to have jumped directly out of the frying pan and right into the fire.
What a pity. I've always had a soft spot for third political parties that actually work and win seats and get somewhere, so the Liberal Democrats have always been a favorite of mine. How I wish America would get a third political party- it doesn't even have to be anything so exciting as the Liberal Democrats, Social Democrats, New Democrats (see Canada)- just one more party. It doesn't have to win everything, it just has to be there and have a voice in the debate so we all don't experience the joyful feeling of walking into the voting booth every couple of years and thinking 'damn, I need these two parties like I need a colonoscopy with no lube.' Yeah, it's that painful.
But I digress: it was interesting as the blessedly short British electoral cycle kicked into gear last year- in fact, I couldn't wait, because, for the first time ever, it was going to feature a live, televised debate between the leaders of all three major parties. I had a tickle in the back of my oxipital about this. The LibDems have had to fight for press attention and coverage every single electoral cycle and with the right leader saying the right things they could break the election wide open- it'd be Kennedy-Nixon all over again, only without the annoying family baggage and Marilyn Monroe floating around in the background.
And wouldn't you know it? I was right. Clegg-o was telegenic, talked sense and looked a helluva lot better than dear old dour Gordon Brown and slick Davey Cameron, he of the repackaged Old Boy's Club and for a couple of weeks it looked as though for one tantalizing moment that the LibDems might have something going. But then Labour and the Tories played catch-up in a big way. Cameron went out of his way to prove that he wasn't Margaret Thatcher in a man suit and when the dust cleared, no one had overall control.
Here's where I've got to give Clegg credit: the man has balls. Big, solid, steel balls. Because he took the biggest political risk any politician anywhere has ever taken in at least twenty years- and if it worked, it was going to reap his party benefits that they had spent nearly a century dreaming about and if it didn't- it was going to look like a four car pile-up on the Interstate at rush hour: not pretty. He had a hard choice. He could have let Labour back in, in which case, he would have been knifed by the electorate anyway. He could have done nothing and let Cameron sputter around with a minority government for awhile- which could have seen him knifed by the electorate if the economy would have gone south in a major way. Or he could swing for the fences.
And that's what he did. He sold his nominally left of center party on a coalition with the Conservatives, said it was right, responsible and demanded as a price what Liberal Democrats had been dreaming of: a vote on voting reform. The idea was, from what I could tell that Clegg and His Home Peeps would act as a calming influence on the rabid tendencies of the Conservatives. Don't want a return the lunatic eurosceptic Thatcherite right wing, he said, put us in there! And that's what they did.
Only it didn't really work out that way. The Conservatives made it clear that they were in charge and that the LibDems were the junior partner and hung their partners out to dry on the massive rise in UK Student Fees which would allow Universities to charge up to $18,000 a year- riots ensued, people were pissed off and it was a massive LibDem walk back as Clegg had promised to hold the line on student fees. People were pissed. People remembered and Clegg's gloriously insane gamble exploded in his face.
(As a side note: if there were riots in the United States everytime Universities raised tuition, there'd be no Universities left. They would all be smoking holes in the ground. Disaffected, apathetic college students take note: you're being hosed!)
But it's worse than that: the voting reform referendum got spanked. Hard. Clegg came closer than any Liberal leader ever had and was rebuffed. The Conservatives didn't help by pretty much running against their coalition partners on this one- Cameron's strategy apparently is to use the LibDems as a bomb shelter to cover his ass from all the budget cutting he's going to have to do in the name of economic austerity. If there's any comfort for the LibDems at the end of this godawful week, it's that Cameron's strategy seems to have blown up in his face as well. By not buttressing the LibDem vote even the slightest bit and just letting them swing, he wrought a whole new Constitutional problem in Scotland, where the LibDems collapsed in a heap (as they apparently did nationwide) and Labour still hasn't pulled it's head of its ass and the Scottish Nationalist Party came waltzing into sole control of the Scottish Parliament.
Ooops. Latest polls from over there show that maybe 1/3rd of Scots are in favor of independence- but SNP Leader Alex Salmond is playing it cool, pushing for a referendum not now, but in 2014 at the earliest, when he might have made enough of a case for independence to get a win.
Cameron and the Tories have made a hash of this, exposing the coalition for what it was all along, not a coalition, but a marriage of convinience- which has suddenly become quite inconvinient for the LibDems. It may not happen now, it may not happen two months from now, but I'm betting Britain will be heading for the polls by year's end if not sooner. The LibDems were hung out to dry by their supposed coalition partners and they need to get the knifings over with, get some distances from this mess and start picking up the pieces as soon as they possibly can.
Hard to blame Clegg though. I can't say I can think of any other LibDem leader that would have passed up the opportunity to get a shot at a referendum on voting reform- problem is though that if you sell people on the idea that you can control the crazy Tories, you've actually got to be able to do that. He didn't and the biggest political gamble of all time exploded as a result.
Again though, Cameron and the Tories reap what they sow. They hung the LibDems out to dry, perhaps operating under the assumption that the Conservative Party would somehow make inroads in Scotland- which was beyond foolish. The Labour Landslide of 1997 wiped them out and the Scots remember nearly two decades of right-wing foolishness in Britain. They're not going blue anytime soon, if ever. It might have seemed like good politics at the time, but standing by while the LibDems got knifed and left for dead means that Prime Minister Cameron and all his merry men now have the looming prospect of a Scottish Independence vote to deal with and all the Constitutional messiness that will entail.
In other words, they've jumped straight from the frying pan directly into the fire. If I was Clegg and the LibDems, I'd cut your losses and return the favor. Hang Cameron and the Boys out to dry and see how they tackle the new reality. If nothing else, Britain would then really know what kind of a government they've got.
And, after all, turnabout is fair play.
Late Night Chronicles 83: Thoughts on Justice
Published on Facebook today...
The news broke last Sunday night just as I was preparing to leave for a week of training up at the Law Enforcement Academy in Des Moines: apparently, Osama Bin Laden had been killed by US Forces. The evil one, the bastard, asshole, tyrant, evildoer, terrorist mastermind, kingpin, dickhead, whatever you want to call him had finally been caught and, as many had predicted, been killed. Like most everyone else, I sat glued to the television and the internet, watching as details on the daring Navy Seal Raid emerged and then I listened to the President's statement and I went to bed.
It wasn't until about 7:35 the next morning, when I found myself in a bit of a traffic jam trying to get onto the base at Camp Dodge (where the Law Enforcement Academy is, apparently) that it struck me that the world had, once again, as it usually does, changed. It also made me a bit nervous when the gate guard asked for two forms of identification- as all military forces worldwide had upped their security- something I hadn't even considered- but he seemed happy enough to glance at my driver's license and a credit card with my name on it and let me through. Of course finding the Law Enforcement Academy proved to be a bit of a challenge, but I managed it and after that, my week began.
People had warned me about the Academy. I don't really know why. It was quiet- freakishly quiet after hours and I had a very large room all to myself. And, glories of glories, there was no internet to speak of, no television and no contact with the outside world other than my cell phone. It was a week of solitude in which I did a lot of reading- and thinking, despite the somewhat uncomfortable beds.
And what I came up with was this: well done. That's literally all I could come up with. A lot of people were somewhat leery of the spontaneous celebrations of patriotism that broke out everywhere Sunday night and some people were downright snotty about them, but I think that's OK. I mean, it was as if a weight had been lifted off the world. The guy who did the deed, the awful deed that's engrained into a generation, ten years ago is dead. Why wouldn't you feel an overwhelming sense of relief at that? Yet we have to temper that by noting that the guy, dickhead though he was, was shot in the head. I'm not sure we should make a habit of celebrating when people get shot in the head- some fool television exec might decide to make a reality show out of it. So while I felt pretty damn good about it, I wasn't about to do a cartwheel either.
Then came the inevitable question, from the usual source: what are the political implications for President Obama? This question was put to me roughly an hour after the annoucement had been made to which my initial thought was 'damned if I know.' But as I said, a monastic week of solitude gives you a lot of time to think, so here's my take on that as well:
The political implications for the President? Diddly squat. I think he'll get a nice, short term burst of happiness from people that might see him tick upwards in the polls but he's still in one helluva tight spot and 2012 is going to be a very, very close election and at this point I still think it's a 50-50 split on whether or not he'll win. Yes, traditionally post World War II elections have been very kind to incumbents seeking re-election and that's a huge advantage, but it's not everything.
First, there's the Republicans. The fact that they're keeping their powder so dry is starting to irritate me immensely, because I'll be damned if I'll see Donald Trump as the Republican nominee. At first I thought it was because their crop of candidates is about as appealing as a boil on your ass and then I thought it was because they were all shaking like little children at the prospect of Sarah Palin getting in the race but now I think they might actually have a few brain cells between them. The longer they keep quiet, the longer they keep the spotlight on the President. He has to explain the economy. He has to explain gas prices. He has to explain inflation. If he's got no clear opponent, then the spotlight is all on him.
Second, there's his other foreign policy messes. Now that Bin Laden is dead, the pressure is really on. He's got to fix Afghanistan and start wrapping that show up there and then he's got to disentangle himself from the rapidly growing mess he made in Libya. I still say that means ratcheting up military pressure and aid to the rebels and the Berbers in the Western Mountains (no friends of Colonel Nutbag) as well as the political strategy. You need one or two solid military victories and I think you might break western Libya wide open- especially as economic sanctions really start to bite.
Third, there's the plain and simple dictum brought to us by Bill Clinton: 'it's the economy, stupid.' 2012 is going to swing on the price of food and the price of gas no more, no less and I don't care if the Republicans run Barney Fife against the President: if gas is $6-8 a gallon this time next year, he's toast. People vote with their pocketbooks and money is tight enough for everyone right now that if the pain gets worse, they won't care who his opponent is, anyone who can get prices down and get the economy under control will do.
So at the end of the day, is this a big win for the President? Oh no doubt- it's a big win for all of us if you want to get right down to it- but is it a game-changing win? I don't know. Probably not. Though the President's laser sharp focus on this issue was a pleasant surprise. By all accounts, he sat down with his National Security Team, said 'let's find the bastard' and that's what they went out and did. Granted they may have gotten extremely lucky, but a job well done is a job well done- and I have a sneaking suspicion that it would have been done a lot sooner if someone in the Pakistani government hadn't been looking the other way.
I read a column in the New York Post today comparing the death of Bin Laden to the death of the Mahdi in the Sudan a century ago. A radical Jihadist, he besieged the British at Khartoum, defeated them and chased them out of the Sunday. 13 years later, the British stormed back in and chased his successors right out of the place again and that was the end of radical Jihadism in the area for at least a century. I don't know if I'd go that far, but I think, ironically enough that Facebook and Twitter have done far more damage to Islamic Fundamentalism than any invasion or airstrike we've ever thought of. The people in the streets of Cairo, those young people, affecting non-violent change? They were all on Facebook and Twitter and they didn't look to be too enthusiastic about Al-Qaeda. The Ayatollah? I'm betting he doesn't have a Facebook page either... progress, in this case represented by the technological change of the internet is the enemy of fundamentalists of all stripes, everywhere and I think if you really think about it, the true hammer blow to Al-Qaeda came on the streets of Cairo. Whether people want to admit it or not, Egypt is seen as the center of the Arab world- which makes what happened there an upheaval of historical proportions.
Bin Laden, now dead, was merely caught in the crossfire. Which, as the President said, was justice- very well done.
The news broke last Sunday night just as I was preparing to leave for a week of training up at the Law Enforcement Academy in Des Moines: apparently, Osama Bin Laden had been killed by US Forces. The evil one, the bastard, asshole, tyrant, evildoer, terrorist mastermind, kingpin, dickhead, whatever you want to call him had finally been caught and, as many had predicted, been killed. Like most everyone else, I sat glued to the television and the internet, watching as details on the daring Navy Seal Raid emerged and then I listened to the President's statement and I went to bed.
It wasn't until about 7:35 the next morning, when I found myself in a bit of a traffic jam trying to get onto the base at Camp Dodge (where the Law Enforcement Academy is, apparently) that it struck me that the world had, once again, as it usually does, changed. It also made me a bit nervous when the gate guard asked for two forms of identification- as all military forces worldwide had upped their security- something I hadn't even considered- but he seemed happy enough to glance at my driver's license and a credit card with my name on it and let me through. Of course finding the Law Enforcement Academy proved to be a bit of a challenge, but I managed it and after that, my week began.
People had warned me about the Academy. I don't really know why. It was quiet- freakishly quiet after hours and I had a very large room all to myself. And, glories of glories, there was no internet to speak of, no television and no contact with the outside world other than my cell phone. It was a week of solitude in which I did a lot of reading- and thinking, despite the somewhat uncomfortable beds.
And what I came up with was this: well done. That's literally all I could come up with. A lot of people were somewhat leery of the spontaneous celebrations of patriotism that broke out everywhere Sunday night and some people were downright snotty about them, but I think that's OK. I mean, it was as if a weight had been lifted off the world. The guy who did the deed, the awful deed that's engrained into a generation, ten years ago is dead. Why wouldn't you feel an overwhelming sense of relief at that? Yet we have to temper that by noting that the guy, dickhead though he was, was shot in the head. I'm not sure we should make a habit of celebrating when people get shot in the head- some fool television exec might decide to make a reality show out of it. So while I felt pretty damn good about it, I wasn't about to do a cartwheel either.
Then came the inevitable question, from the usual source: what are the political implications for President Obama? This question was put to me roughly an hour after the annoucement had been made to which my initial thought was 'damned if I know.' But as I said, a monastic week of solitude gives you a lot of time to think, so here's my take on that as well:
The political implications for the President? Diddly squat. I think he'll get a nice, short term burst of happiness from people that might see him tick upwards in the polls but he's still in one helluva tight spot and 2012 is going to be a very, very close election and at this point I still think it's a 50-50 split on whether or not he'll win. Yes, traditionally post World War II elections have been very kind to incumbents seeking re-election and that's a huge advantage, but it's not everything.
First, there's the Republicans. The fact that they're keeping their powder so dry is starting to irritate me immensely, because I'll be damned if I'll see Donald Trump as the Republican nominee. At first I thought it was because their crop of candidates is about as appealing as a boil on your ass and then I thought it was because they were all shaking like little children at the prospect of Sarah Palin getting in the race but now I think they might actually have a few brain cells between them. The longer they keep quiet, the longer they keep the spotlight on the President. He has to explain the economy. He has to explain gas prices. He has to explain inflation. If he's got no clear opponent, then the spotlight is all on him.
Second, there's his other foreign policy messes. Now that Bin Laden is dead, the pressure is really on. He's got to fix Afghanistan and start wrapping that show up there and then he's got to disentangle himself from the rapidly growing mess he made in Libya. I still say that means ratcheting up military pressure and aid to the rebels and the Berbers in the Western Mountains (no friends of Colonel Nutbag) as well as the political strategy. You need one or two solid military victories and I think you might break western Libya wide open- especially as economic sanctions really start to bite.
Third, there's the plain and simple dictum brought to us by Bill Clinton: 'it's the economy, stupid.' 2012 is going to swing on the price of food and the price of gas no more, no less and I don't care if the Republicans run Barney Fife against the President: if gas is $6-8 a gallon this time next year, he's toast. People vote with their pocketbooks and money is tight enough for everyone right now that if the pain gets worse, they won't care who his opponent is, anyone who can get prices down and get the economy under control will do.
So at the end of the day, is this a big win for the President? Oh no doubt- it's a big win for all of us if you want to get right down to it- but is it a game-changing win? I don't know. Probably not. Though the President's laser sharp focus on this issue was a pleasant surprise. By all accounts, he sat down with his National Security Team, said 'let's find the bastard' and that's what they went out and did. Granted they may have gotten extremely lucky, but a job well done is a job well done- and I have a sneaking suspicion that it would have been done a lot sooner if someone in the Pakistani government hadn't been looking the other way.
I read a column in the New York Post today comparing the death of Bin Laden to the death of the Mahdi in the Sudan a century ago. A radical Jihadist, he besieged the British at Khartoum, defeated them and chased them out of the Sunday. 13 years later, the British stormed back in and chased his successors right out of the place again and that was the end of radical Jihadism in the area for at least a century. I don't know if I'd go that far, but I think, ironically enough that Facebook and Twitter have done far more damage to Islamic Fundamentalism than any invasion or airstrike we've ever thought of. The people in the streets of Cairo, those young people, affecting non-violent change? They were all on Facebook and Twitter and they didn't look to be too enthusiastic about Al-Qaeda. The Ayatollah? I'm betting he doesn't have a Facebook page either... progress, in this case represented by the technological change of the internet is the enemy of fundamentalists of all stripes, everywhere and I think if you really think about it, the true hammer blow to Al-Qaeda came on the streets of Cairo. Whether people want to admit it or not, Egypt is seen as the center of the Arab world- which makes what happened there an upheaval of historical proportions.
Bin Laden, now dead, was merely caught in the crossfire. Which, as the President said, was justice- very well done.
Thoughts On The Great White North
Hmmm... well, the United Kingdom had some local and regional elections this past week but Canada teed up for the whole she-bang, one, big, sexy Federal Election and it produced an interesting result. The final breakdown looks like this:
Conservative-167 seats-39.62%
NDP-102 seats-30.62%
Liberal- 34 seats- 18.91%
Bloc Quebecois- 4 seats- 6.05%
Green- 1 seat-3.91%
Independent-0 seats- 0.43%
So it looks like Steven Harper gets to stay on as Prime Minister- this time with an absolute majority. The Green Party picked up a seat in British Columbia, putting them on the scoreboard for the first time but two things are surprising: first, the Liberal Party cratered hard. Leader Michael Ignatieff apparently didn't get the job done and I've seen some Canadian commentary indicating that he rubbed people the wrong way by being a little too eager for the job, but I'm not sure if that was a major issue in it. For sure, something didn't work for the Liberals in a pretty major way.
In Quebec, the Bloc Quebecois was wiped off the map, hard and came away with 4 seats.
But the real story was the NDP or New Democrats which vaulted over the Liberal Party into second place and looks to be at least one more electoral cycle away from cementing a political re-alignment and eclipsing the Liberals as the many opposition party in Canada. It may be a little too soon to say that for certain yet, but the next few years are going to be very interesting and it'll be interesting to see if the Liberals swing left in an attempt to fill the space of the Left that they vacated in a move towards the center and that was filled by the NDP.
All in all, an interesting Canadian election...
Conservative-167 seats-39.62%
NDP-102 seats-30.62%
Liberal- 34 seats- 18.91%
Bloc Quebecois- 4 seats- 6.05%
Green- 1 seat-3.91%
Independent-0 seats- 0.43%
So it looks like Steven Harper gets to stay on as Prime Minister- this time with an absolute majority. The Green Party picked up a seat in British Columbia, putting them on the scoreboard for the first time but two things are surprising: first, the Liberal Party cratered hard. Leader Michael Ignatieff apparently didn't get the job done and I've seen some Canadian commentary indicating that he rubbed people the wrong way by being a little too eager for the job, but I'm not sure if that was a major issue in it. For sure, something didn't work for the Liberals in a pretty major way.
In Quebec, the Bloc Quebecois was wiped off the map, hard and came away with 4 seats.
But the real story was the NDP or New Democrats which vaulted over the Liberal Party into second place and looks to be at least one more electoral cycle away from cementing a political re-alignment and eclipsing the Liberals as the many opposition party in Canada. It may be a little too soon to say that for certain yet, but the next few years are going to be very interesting and it'll be interesting to see if the Liberals swing left in an attempt to fill the space of the Left that they vacated in a move towards the center and that was filled by the NDP.
All in all, an interesting Canadian election...
Bookshot #20: The Dark Knight Strikes Again
I cannot begin to tell you how face-meltingly awesome this book was. OK, so technically it's a graphic novel and if you want to be one of those people who are snooty about it, you can downgrade to the level of a mere 'comic' but that would be a tragic, stupid mistake on your part and you should read both this- and it's amazing prequel, 'The Dark Knight Returns' to educate yourself on the awesomeness of Frank Miller.
For those three people out there who don't know, yes, this is the same Frank Miller who did Sin City and 300 (the latter I liked a lot better than the former) and created Batman:Year One a lot of which was used as the genesis for the movie Batman Begins- and with this, he's managed to top an amazing prequel with something that just about blew my mind.
I loved 'The Dark Knight Returns' it was gritty, dark, psychological and to top it all off, it's climax features a truly mind-blowing battle between Batman and Superman that I would be surprised could ever be done true justice on the silver screen. At the end of that book, Bruce Wayne fakes his death, blows up his fancy castle and disappears with the new Robin (a girl!) and a cadre of loyal followers retreating to watch and wait as the world goes to hell around him.
Three years later (though in reality it was quite a bit later) Batman reemerges not just to tackle the problems of crime and evildoers, but to get to the heart of the real criminals- in this case an authoritarian police state that has hijacked the United States. Superman has become a political tool of the government and most of the other superheroes are captured (Atom is trapped in a petri dish, The Flash has been running in a giant hamster wheel to generate power for a nice chunk of the country) or in hiding and things are getting shittier by the day. In short order, Batman blows the lid off the whole damn thing: the President is a computer generated program controlled by Brainiac and Lex Luxthor and eventually everyone gets on the same page and starts kicking ass.
Some key revelations that I love: Superman and Wonder Woman are lovers. And have a kid, Lara- who emerges to do some serious damage in the book. But it's the portrayal of Superman and the interplay between him and Wonder Woman that I loved the most. Superman is at his most vulnerable. He's trying to do the right thing, but failing, Batman kicks him around some more, so he flees to the rubble of the Fortress of Solitude and feels sorry for himself for a bit. Wonder Woman, of course, shows up and knocks some sense into him. Sex ensues. AWESOME. It's a huge step away from all these portrayals of Superman as a divine, Jesus-like figure which piss me off and allows him to embrace his inner alien while at the same time exploring his vulnerabilities. After all, if you're the Man of Steel, there's nothing like getting your ass kicked to make you question everything.
The other thing: the colors! After the grays and muted palette of 'The Dark Knight Returns' these colors explode off the page in a vivid tornado that only adds to the story. Also, it seems that Miller, once again, refuses to be bound by the usual strictures of medium, which initially made me somewhat leery of this book. I picked it up, looked through it and it just didn't look at that good to me, from an aesthetic point of view, but once I sat down and read it, I realized that the aesthetics are what makes the book work. It's different, it's futuristic and it's not an old Bruce Wayne fighting in the autumn of his career as the 'The Dark Knight Returns' was, it's a Bruce Wayne revitalized, with a sense of purpose, ready to kick ass. So all in all, it makes sense.
Overall: This is an amazing graphic novel, one of the classics of the medium. A must read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)