Sometimes, I'm glad I'm wrong...sometimes (or: The Fall)

Well, I guess I was premature in my obituary concerning Obama--at least as it relates to this supposed anti-semitic speech from a prominent black leader, ostensibly buddy-buddy with Barack. It has yet, surprisingly, to take hold in any major media outlets so far. Part of the reason, I'm sure, is that there is no audio or video recording from the event to loop endlessly on YouTube, verifying or vilifying either side. Convenient for whoever is full of shit, no?

Though, one wonders, who had more to loose? And, why would the woman cry foul? Why would the preacher preach divison and stereotypes at an event honoring the very minority he was supposedly lambasting? Is it possible, as now seems to be the accepted 'reality' of what happened that day, that this was just a miscommunication? My ass.

It all stinks to me--stinks of political ulterior motives; of not-so-thinly veiled antagonisms; of an already fatigued electorate finding one more reason to stay home in November and say "Fuck it."

So, who benefits the most here? In the fall, that'd be John McCain.

The day Obama died...

Or at least his chances of becoming president. Or even the Democratic candidate, while I'm at it.

As most of you at this point might be aware, lighting has now twice struck the junior senator's presidential bid in the form of associations with angry black men of the cloth who like to call whitey and himey names...like whitey and himey. OK, not exactly, but you know I'm referring to. This time, though, it was a chump move against an actually (can you beleive it?) bona fide good jew. I mean, c'mon, how ironic can you get? This "preacher" does his thing (preaching) right after they give a big-time jew an award for being soooo awesome to poor, inner-city black kids. Whaaa?!?

This is just my gut feeling mixed with a mild hangover, granted, but I'm calling it toady. It's over folks. Do I hope I'm wrong? Sure. And not for being a Barack lover, though he has elicited a few butterflies in my stomach on occasion. For example, the first time he had to defend his involvement with another old, bitter "man of god" of the Black Liberation Theology type. He masterfully and genuinely (damn, I hope I wasn't a sucker) responded with one of the best--by far--if not only moving and important speeches in my life from the lips of a politician, or "man of the people." I don't think he, or the public, has it in him/them again. Or maybe it's just the umpteenth can of Schaefer from last night talking.

Finally, a good argument against the U.S. smoking-ban sensation.

At least one better than the "freedom" to be a dumb-ass (this includes me), anyway.

Apparently it's been found that in and around areas that have forbid smoking in public places, mostly bars and restaurants, drunk-driving accidents have dramatically spiked. The reason, as with "dry" counties next to more libation-liberal ones, is that people are driving further to get their smoking-indoors-beer-in-hand fix where they can. Which means folks driving drunk longer (and pissed off for it) in places their less familiar with. This could have been foreseen owing to America's entrenched car dependence and lack of public transportation. And, of course, this phenomenon has probably gone unnoticed in big cities, at least initially, where most of bans have been enacted; a function of the inverse relationship of transportation in cities as opposed to suburban and exurban areas.

Still, it brings into question the logic and efficacy of neighboring municipalities, cities, or states enacting conflicting statutes. Essential to the gun-control/rights debate; one of the things that lead to both the voting rights act and a federal policy on abortion; and, though perhaps of less import, the increasing number of states legalizing to some degree (that to which they can profit) gambling. Those who espouse the diversity of regulations among states say this adds to the freedom of the citizen, allowing him to move between jurisdictions as his own moral compass dictates. However, reality has played out differently. As is the case with abortion, those who would rather see something done away with completely claim local jurisdiction, knowing a given region is repressive and reactionary enough to easily ban it. So to with those wishing to erase the inevitable scars of gun violence. (Funny how, for these two issues, the champions of "freedom" become proponents of state intervention.)

(To be continued...)

Wouldn't it be nice?

This was in a "Special Section" in the New York Times:

“I’m taking the rest of the year off,” one senior banker said with a chuckle. “Call me in 2009.”

About $861 billion worth of deals worldwide were struck in the quarter that ended Monday, according to data from Dealogic. Representing a 22 percent plunge from the same time a year ago, it presages a slow year for mergers practitioners — and some bankers are writing off 2008 completely.

I'm not much for thievery, achem , but if you like Portishead

Check their new album, still not out yet. But you can get it here. Hit the "free" option and wait a couple of minutes. Then select the one of the places to download from. The first time I tried, it didn't work. If this happens choose a different one. Worked for me one the second try. Sweet. Listening to it at the moment; a little different, but still good. Still Portishead. Enjoy!

The Thin Purple Line

(My first op/ed piece as the editor of the op/ed section in the Campus, CCNY's newspaper. Dig it. I realize this is a bit dated, but whatever.)

The pendulum of momentum swung back towards Mrs. Clinton this past week, with wins in the two key states of Ohio and Texas. Just as her supporters had been looking for Clinton to clinch the Democratic nomination on a super-Tuesday not so long ago, this past Tuesday, Obabma's legions were hoping to wrap it up and go home, to no avail. Though Obama still leads in overall delegates, the specter of the superdelegates looms large over the race more and more, of which Clinton currently has the edge. In the end, if the Democratic nominee is decided by this vestige of political elitism, akin to the Brit's House of Lords, the party would be wise to make sure the outcome remains inline with the choice of the "little" people. If, say, Obama wins the majority of pledged delegates and the popular vote but Clinton is nominated because of she has more superdelegates (who make up almost 20% of the total vote at the convention), the Democrats risk alienating many of the independents and center voters that have come out, especially for Obama, and that they'll need come November to defeat the other “middle of the road" candidate who just secured his party's nomination.

Fear not young Republicans—there must be a few of you reading—never underestimate a man who, when given the opportunity to be released from a POW camp, chose to eat maggot-filled rice with his buddies. Still, John McCain might find it even more difficult navigating the "thin purple line" dividing the unusually un-polarized current political landscape. Independent, swing, centrist—whatever you call them, most feel they will be deciding the outcome of this fall's presidential election. If lulled into a false sense of security by the ease with which they eventually secured their parties nomination, a step in the wrong direction from the McCain camp, like appealing too strongly to either the right or the center, could prove fatal. They must find a way to rally the infamous Karl Rove bible-thumping NASCAR enthusiasts, while not foregoing the non-partisan, non-traditional Republican attitude that got him this far. McCain might have already overstepped by rushing to Bush Jr.’s side in the White House, accepting his endorsement after clinching the nomination. As well, one notes with disapproval the association of the senator with a right-wing radio talk show host that believes the end-times are near.

And, speaking of Revelations, a fond farewell for pastor Huckabee. He never really had a chance: nobody likes a goody-two-shoes, not even the religious right. Bush II appealed to these voters not in spite but because of his once was party-boy lost, but now sober found. Redemption seems to be a popular theme in the red states, and losing a lot of weight doesn't count. Sorry, Mike.

Speaking of redemption, or the lack thereof, it appears Ralph Nader has yet to learn his lesson from the past two presidential elections he has run in: he is screwing over the people who love him! Yes, we know you are a man of principles and convictions, Ralph, that's why we love you. You are determined and a fighter, that's also why we love you. But, as is often the case, with great intelligence and abilities comes great hubris and stubbornness, that's why you're really starting to piss us off. It was bad enough in 2000, when you effectively put the race in the hands of the Supreme Court and, surprise, we know how that turned out. In 2004, with even less grassroots support than previously, you did everything you could to make the Democrats look bad because of their attempts to keep you off the ballot. Was that the typical sketchy, big-party, partisan political wrangling that we all were (and still are) sick to death of? Yes. Did your candidacy truly expose anything we didn't already know or do anything of significant good? No, of course not. At best, you had no effect at all, the last election could only be blamed on a collective American brain-freeze. Except this, Ralph, and this is the main point at the moment: you're making yourself and any attempts to reform so much of what's wrong the big business of politics as usual look bad. Stop it! You're hurting your own cause, silly. Make us proud again. You have done important things and people will listen to you, so make it count when you do speak up. Running for president is not the only way to get your message out—unless that message is, look at me I'm becoming as crazy as Ron Paul and his supporters.

Alan Dershowitz is a piece of crap...

He just got called a "conspiracy theorist" for proposing that Spitzer was set up. ("That bitch set me up!" --Marion Barry) What nobody seems to be talking about is that as opposed to most who've gotten caught with their pants, well, maybe without their pants off (Clinton, Gringrich, Kennedy, Larry Craig, et al.), Elliot paid for it. And not just a casual indiscretion, but a well planned out and creatively funded (illegally and, apparently, the reason he was found out) tryst. Most importantly, and like the others, for me it's not about the vice, it's about the recklessness of a public official who's aware of the potential consequences--especially a Mr. Goody-two-shoes prosecutor who hasn't hesitated to wax holier-than-thou before--it's just plain stupid. (Further, it probably betrays a certain unconscious desire--sorry, but this is my bread and butter--to get caught.) Cover your ass. That's part of a job, of his job. And if you fuck up and get caught, you're fired.

"What comes around, goes around," Dershowitz finally admits.

"Find your friends. Track your friends."

Alright, GoogleMaps was one thing. Facebook was another. Now this: Spokeo. A "hyper"-aggregator of virtually every online community or social network that has public information up on the web. Simply put, for those of us that use these various tools (MySpace, Flickr, Blogger, etc.) throughout the day, every change in status, including just being logged in, will be compiled to a profile of you constantly being updated. Thus, your "friends" can keep track of almost every move you make online, and you theirs. I so don't give a shit that much about what someone I know, or likely don't really know that well, perhaps only online, is doing. It's too easy, anyway. Part of the fun in finding something out about someone (or something) is the hunt. Sissies.

Up in Harlem, walking on Convent Ave...

I saw this printed on the back of a Carhart-type jacket in front of me.




And it made me think of this.

(Doing this post, I realize I've seen myself doing this post before...weird. )

...let the motherfucker burn.

The electoral college needs to go. It's served its originally intended purpose of the enhancing the stature of the smaller states, while not neutering the big ones. Along with it, or to start, state party autonomy for primaries is outmoded and has the effect of disenfranchising various groups of the population (see Florida and Michigan Democratic primaries). Federal standards, rules and regulations of all types make demands in other national elections--put some good ones into practice at the federal electoral level as well. For example, all voting must take place either on a weekend day or a national holiday must be enforced so that all people, including the majority of working people will have not only the opportunity but the ease of means to encourage and facilitate the highest possible turn out.

Do I really need to explain this one?

Nah.

What's the difference between the police and the militia in Basra?

Not much, if anything, according to the Times. If you'd like a probable picture of what Iraq, or parts of it anyway, would look like if the pull-outs continue, look to the oil-rich, non-sectarian, and relatively stable southern port-city of Basra. After giving up control about six months ago, the British now sit, waiting on the outskirts of a major player, second only to Baghdad, in Iraq's chances for a future without the hand-holding of outsiders, while murders and kidnappings continue to ratchet up.



My personal fave: "One especially disturbing trend is the slaying of at least 100 women in the last year, according to the police. The Iraqi authorities have blamed Shiite militiamen for many of those killing, saying the militants had probably deemed the women to be impious." Oh, and don't forget the "doctors, teachers, and other professionals," that are simply just too Western for these "holy" men. Hmm, visions of the Taliban or the Cultural Revolution dancing in anyones head?

Unfortunately, the lack of sectarian division in the predominantly Shiite population does not a cradle of civilization make.