April 28, 2007
TIER-FOUR INTELLIGENCE
There are very few things that infuriate me (and let's face it, lots of things do) quite like positions of significant politicalimportance being manned by idiots. Not to be a snob, but....let's face it, I want the Harvard/Stanford/Michigan guys in the White House situation room when the shit hits the fan, not some guy with a mail-order Associate's Degree. The worst part about the Monica Lewinsky story, for example, was that no one was questioning what a community college drop-out was doing working in such a high-level position.
Fast forward to the present day and the US Attorneys fiasco, and I think the most irritating fact is that there are over 150 graduates of something called "Regent University School of Law" working in the Justice Department. Spend five minutes watching this video to get most of the facts in a suitably humorous format. It's good to know that a lot of the most important positions in our legal community are filled by people who went to the 136th-best law school in the nation, neck-and-neck with such academic bastions as Appalachian School of Law, Florida Costal School of Law, Thomas Cooley (!!!!), Northern Kentucky, and University of Detroit Mercy.
When I think about my individual liberties, I sleep well knowing that the law is being enforced according to the standards of a school that was known as Christian Broadcasting Network School of Law fifteen years ago.
April 27, 2007
WEAK WEEK
This week was pretty sorry here on ginandtacos, and for that I apologize. When my fever gets down under 130 degrees I will find the energy to feel worse about it. I am working up an epic Virginia Tech rant, but it's neither complete nor appropriate for a No Politics Friday.
April 24, 2007
TWO RAPID REVIEWS
1. The Aqua Teen Hunger Force Movie is, well....exactly what you would expect the Aqua Teen Hunger Force Movie to be. We're talking about a TV show whose 12-minute episodes can sometimes seem far too long. So at 87 minutes, this film will definitely drag unless the mere sight of the Plutonians is enough to entertain you. HOWEVER. However. WITH THAT SAID: The first 4 minutes of this film are possibly the funniest thing I have ever seen. I quite literally could not breathe or see by the time the opening sequence ended. I will not give anything away except that it prominently features the "Let's All Go to the Lobby" cartoon characters. And Mastodon.
2. Don't call it a comeback, but...Year Zero is actually pretty good. True, just about anything would be an improvement over With Teeth, but aside from the apparent tendency to put one appalling faux-New Order "radio" single on each album ("Survivalism") this album suggests graceful aging combined with a healthy dose of that which worked in the past.
April 23, 2007
PEANUT BUTTER JELLY TIME IN HEAVEN
I had a "Layne Staley" moment this morning - I read the news of Yeltsin's passing and could only think "Really? I thought he died like five years ago."
April 20, 2007
MAILING IT IN
Sorry for mailing it in, but all you get this Friday is a link to something that will pass the time and enrich your life.
The Black Table is a fine website filled with quality and almost always amusing writing. It's a voluminous site and one could easily drown in the chaff, so let me point out the wheat - specifically, the "How-To" index. It includes step-by-step instructions (often accompanied by photos) on performing such crucial tasks as making Pruno (prison wine), making cigarettes out of spinach, and making a lamp out of a blender (which, if the repeated disclaimers are to be heeded, is quite hazardous relative to the inherent value of the final product). The Pruno tome is a classic, but don't skip epics like "From Bacon to Soap: The Impossible Journey" and the two-part odyssey "The Road to Turducken" either.
If you choose to follow the procedures outlined in "How to Make Your Own Jesus Toast" and sell your creation on eBay, I demand a finder's fee for having directed you thusly.
April 18, 2007
CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING
Take note of how the mass killings at Virginia Tech have made you feel - upset, frightened, confused, angry, empty, whatever. It seems to have left the entire nation stunned and, at least for a brief moment before the NRA springs into action, reflective. I share all of those sentiments in response to this senseless and horrific act of violence.
Now take the way that you feel and try to imagine having three or four of these incidents every single day for three years. I suspect you can't imagine that. It wouldn't be hard if you lived in Baghdad, though. You wouldn't have to "imagine" anything. Between 50 and 200 civilians dead at the hands of suicide bombers and execution squads is an average day in Iraq.
Just keep that in mind as you realize how awful these 33 needless deaths make you feel.
April 16, 2007
STRANGE BEDFELLOWS
Another week, another shooting spree in a public place. Faced with an opportunity to gloat about how this never would have happened if only the victims had been heavily armed themselves, somewhere Wayne LaPierre is smiling. Then again, so is Marc Lepine.
April 13, 2007
NPF
Today's No Politics Friday (tm) is devoted to my strange, strange list of places I desperately want to visit. Those who know me well know that I enjoy traveling, and moreover that I enjoy traveling to places that range from "esoteric" to "borderline interesting" to "flat-out dull."
On my top 10 list is a small strip of beach outside Princess Juliana airport on the island of St. Maarten, on which one can stand while 747s land no more than 20-30 feet above eye level. All those who have experienced it describe it as ass-rapingly loud, completely terrifying, and not to be missed.
Where do I sign?
April 12, 2007
GRAB SOME POPCORN
With little fanfare and even less attention from the media, Maryland just became the third state to deviate from the "traditional" means of awarding its electoral votes. However, unlike Maine and Nebraska (which allocate EVs based on Congressional districts, with the two votes from the Senate seats awarded as a bonus to the overall winner of the state) Maryland will commit all of its electors to the winner of the national popular vote.
Now, I have always had it in for the Electoral College. It is truly a ridiculous anachronism with absolutely no benefits to counterbalance its considerable potential for disaster and complication. Let's look at some common arguments in favor of the EC:
I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that none of the arguments in favor of the EC make any sense....and far beside the point, they all represent "bouncing ball" logic (i.e., if this reason doesn't justify it then how about this one? And when that one fails then how about we move on to this one?). In short, none of these "defenses" relate to the original purpose of the EC. The founders didn't institute the system to "ensure broad geographic support" and they sure as hell didn't do it to ensure the hegemony of the two major parties (which not only didn't exist at the time but were also seen as highly inimical to the idea of democracy). They created it for two reasons and two reasons only, neither of which are relevant today and neither of which are addressed even tangentially by contemporary 'defenses' of the system.
First, they wanted a buffer between the public and the presidency. Electors were actually supposed to sit around and debate for whom they should cast their votes. In other words, states were supposed to select (by whatever method they so chose - more on that in a bit) a group of "betters" to make the choices that the public was clearly far too stupid to make properly. The popular vote would inevitably go to demagogues and buffoons, so the EC was a way to make sure that the elite would still prevail and choose a proper, dignified leader. Does anyone think that electors still sit around and deliberate like this? If so, please put your head in an oven ASAP. An hour at 450 should do it.
Second, the EC was intended as a backdoor to allowing elections to be decided in Congress - which is what our "democracy-loving" founding fathers wanted all along. They created a system that gave the illusion of democracy (every state gets to play a role!) but one that they felt would never provide a majority winner aside from General G-Dub. Remember, travel and communication were slow, laborious, and poor at the time so the idea of a "national" campaign was inconceivable to them. Equally importantly, there were no political parties when they devised this system, and hence nothing to limit the field. They assumed, quite logically given the circumstances, that the election would be split among 5 or more regional candidates (NE, Mid-Atlantic, South, West, etc) with no majority. Of course, elections lacking an EC majority are decided in the House. How convenient.
Reality intervened. The rise of the party system dramatically winnowed the range of choices, and technological improvements in travel and communication allowed the parties/candidates to mount truly "national" campaigns. Furthermore, states gradually drifted towards awarding electors based on a popular vote. Why were they allowed to do so in clear violation of the founders' intent? Article II, Section I, Paragraph 1:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress
The "manner" each legislature chose was initially quite varied. Until 1848, for example, South Carolina simply had its governor choose the electors. Most other states let the State Legislature do it. In short, the process was never intended to be democratic and it was not until the late 1820s that popular vote played any role at all in the process.
So Maryland's recent decision creates huge logistical challenges - how could a "recount" ever be accomplished with such a system? - but there is absolutely nothing that the courts (where opponents of the change plan to take their fight) can do about it. The Constitution is clear as a bell on this issue. State legislatures can choose to appoint electors via a popular vote, by legislative fiat, by coin toss, by 3-on-3 basketball tournament, or by cage match. There's nothing short of a Constitutional amendment that can stop them. Good luck getting that.
I had hoped that the debacle of 2000 was enough to convince people of the folly of the system in the modern context. Significant risk, zero benefit. Indeed some states have taken some action (Colorado did a referendum to switch to the Maine/Nebraska method in 2004, and the CT legislature introduced a bill to do the same - both failed) including the recent Maryland decision. When individual states start making changes without the larger problem being addressed, this does nothing but add even more risk and complexity to the system. So I was wrong. Debacle 2000 was not enough. Apparently there will have to be two or three more complete trainwrecks before people realize what an asinine system we use. So I suppose there's not much else to do but sit back, grab some popcorn, and enjoy the fireworks.
April 10, 2007
THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COULD
With each additional $80 billion "emergency supplemental appropriation" and with the coveted half-trillion dollar mark in sight, the chants of "I think I can! I think I can!" get louder.
April 09, 2007
A MILLION LITTLE (SHITTY) PIECES
Do. Not. Go. See. Grindhouse. If you saw it and enjoyed it, let this sentence serve as warning that you may want to skip this entire entry.
I like Mr. Tarantino. Really. I own all of his movies on DVD, even the one I hated (Kill Bill Vol. 1). But he has unfortunately become the Oprah Book Club for hipsters. That is, attach his name to anything - no matter how obviously ridiculous or awful it looks - and mindless hordes of people in really tight jeans and Walkmen t-shirts will flock to see it like lemmings.
Seeing the previews for Grindhouse, I was struck by several things. I am a person who tends to trust my own eyes more than reviews, recommendations, etc. - and this movie simply looked awful. Second, it was patently obvious that without the hype and Tarantino's name, it would have been ticketed for a straight-to-cable release. It didn't even look good enough to merit straight-to-video. USA Network or TNT quality at best. Third, assuming that everything about the film was identical except for the name(s) of the director(s), there is no way in hell that you would even consider shelling out $9 to see it let alone actually do so.
In short, everything about it screamed "complete piece of shit, cleverly marketed."
So why did I see it? Believe me, I strenuously objected, but A) Liz really wanted to (we are now officially fighting as a result) and B) about 25 of my friends in Bloomington were going out to help cheer up a friend who was very excited about it and just had his relationship go "poof". So for Liz and said friend, I bit the bullet.
It is the biggest mistake I have made in quite some time. This film is, on so many levels, the worst I have ever seen. I am a man who adores bad movies (i.e., You Got Served, Battlefield:Earth) but only when they are unintentionally bad without irony. This did not fit the bill.
The very definition of "satire" implies that the object is somehow being tweaked in violation of social convention - satirizing those in power, the wealthy, the esteemed, or the otherwise socially elevated. So mocking the horror genre is, well, not really satire at all. It's just a combination of beating a dead horse and pointing out the fucking obvious. As such, I was prepared for the Robert Rodriguez portion of this film to be excruciating. Boy, what a visionary it must take to make fun of how bad horror movies are! The film was essentially 90 minutes of wink-wink-nudge-nudge-isn't it funny/clever how bad all of this is?
No, it isn't. If I wanted to see awful dialogue, ridiculous plots, gratuitious nudity/violence, and spurting fake blood everywhere I could just watch an actual horror film. Doing the exact same thing but adding a lot of faux-postmodern "it's somehow intellectually superior if we wink a lot and acknowledge how bad this all is while we're doing it" doesn't really add to the experience. It just makes a generally awful one - watching horror films - a lot more pretentious. As if it's somehow "better" because we're all good, jaded Gen-X liberal pseudo-intellectuals while we're watching it.
Strip all of that away and you're left with the typical shitty, gratuitous slasher movie aimed at the intelligence level of the average 12 year old boy.
"But Ed" you say, "didn't it get better once the Tarantino-directed portion rolled around?" I sure as hell hoped so. I was wrong.
Let me summarize: this was completely phoned-in filler. Start with 30 minutes of absolutely pointless character-development of people who were just going to get killed anyway, add in 20 minutes of horrendous dialogue as the main characters sat around a diner table (stop me if you've seen this before - I'm pretty sure it was just all the scraps that ended up on the cutting room floor from his other films, especially Reservoir Dogs), and cap it off with a 30-minute car chase. The end result? An hour-plus film that should have been about 15 minutes long. It was stupid, rambling, anticlimactic, and (in terms of script and dialogue) essentially like watching Tarantino masturbate for an hour.
In short, fuck this film, fuck everyone stupid enough to fall for its hype and its bald-faced efforts at stroking hipster egos, and fuck its nearly four hour run time. "But Ed, I found it funny / it was humorous in the fact that it was completely over-the-top." Maybe so, but all horror movies are gratuitious in their violence and inherently funny/stupid/ridiculous in how over-the-top they are. So the next time I'm in the mood for that (i.e., never) I'll simply rent Texas Chainsaw Massacre or something similar and spare myself the pretentious hipster wank-fest and all the "we're so much better than this awful shit that when we do it, it ceases to be awful shit and becomes art and/or brilliant social commentary on how awful said shit is" baggage.
I hated this film like few others. Everyone involved with it should die of AIDS. In closing, fuck you.
April 05, 2007
BET ON THE THREE-LEGGED ROCKING HORSE
Since approximately 1964 it has been exceptionally depressing to be a Democrat in this country. The "successes" interspersed among a nearly-unbroken string of awful candidates, sad excuses for leaders, and dismal failures have been Jimmy Carter (!!!) and Bill "I accomplished more of Reagan's agenda than Reagan did" Clinton. And it's just as clear looking ahead to 2008 that this is not exactly the year that will turn things around. I will not belabor the point by re-hashing all of the hand-wringing you have already heard about how once again the Democrats are trying to choose among a pool of horrid potential nominees (HRC, John "Stench of Losing" Edwards, Al Gore, Barack "I've been in the Senate for 5 minutes" Obama, and a host of no-names).
Let's cheer ourselves up by taking a few minutes to point out the equally-obvious (but much more rarely-stated): 2008 promises to be the worst GOP field since the "Who wants to donate their body to run against FDR?" 1940s. In my mind, only 1996 can even come close in terms of offering up a slate of turkeys like this. I mean, as weak as the Democratic field is, the front-runners and eventual winners are relatively easy to identify (Clinton vs. Obama, with Edwards poised to make a run when one of them falters). Who is the Republican front-runner at the moment?
*crickets*
Yeah, I thought so. In such a vacuum, it should be whoever appeals best to the party base (i.e., James Dobson) has the best odds. But we can't even say who that is at the moment. Who is the Religious Right excited about?
Since heavyweights like Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, et al are not about to lower themselves to supporting 4th-rate non-entity candidates like Sam Brownback (and assuming that no one connected to the current administration has a snowball's chance in hell as a potential candidate), who does that leave? Whose star does the massive "GOP base turnout machine" attach itself to?
Are you ready? Grab a seat.
Newt Gingrich.
Yes, the wheels have been set in motion for Gingrich (who just published a book called "Rediscovering God in America" - no word on whether he sent copies to the secretary he was fucking while his wife was getting treated for cancer) to receive the Mark of Approval from the kingmaker himself.
That Newt Gingrich could be the GOP candidate in 2008 (at least it made a shred of sense in 1996) is so far beyond idiotic that it doesn't even bear further discussion. It speaks for itself. As does the fact that among registered Republicans he's polling about 9% right now (and remember, that's with significant name recognition advantages).
So one of two things happens: Dobson, Inc. gets its way and Gingrich is nominated, in which case I can't really imagine a world in which any Democrat could fuck up enough to lose (although HRC could probably find a way). Failing that, a "moderate" like McCain or Giuliani gets nominated over the expressed objections of the leading religious right figures, after which they wash their hands of the election and millions of bible-thumpers stay home on election day or toss support behind some crackpot independent.
As hard as it is to conceive of scenarios under which Obama or Clinton could win the general election, I have to be honest - it's even harder to dream one up in which any of this god-awful Republican field stand a fighting chance.
April 04, 2007
"I SNORTED MY FATHER"
Savor this rare moment - Ed is speechless.
As Bill Hicks once said, Keith went over the edge years ago only to find that there was a ledge over the edge.
April 03, 2007
BAGHDAD = INDIANA, OR: HOW MCCAIN JUMPED THE SHARK
I never particularly liked (or disliked) John McCain, but his Presidential ambitions are turning into a sad, unintentional comedy in multiple acts. His bizarre, possibly drug-fueled assertion this weekend that Baghdad's streets are safe (after he and several Republican Senators strolled an open market under heavily military escort and in Kevlar vests) are to McCain what "The Scream" was to Howard Dean. It's over, and all subsequent efforts on McCain's part are simply going to look pathetic.
In short, the "Baghdad is Safe" speech is officially the point at which McCain 2008 Jumped the Shark (in case you've been living under a rock....here)
McCain visits the Bloomington Farmer's Market on Saturday
This man went to Iraq and, under the protective cover of 100 Army Rangers, two Apache gunships, 6 armored vehicles, and three Blackhawk helicopters, declared that Baghdad is a safe place to walk around (Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana described it as “like a normal outdoor market in Indiana”). Like all of the other war cheerleaders, he's simply desperate and flailing at this point. Like his Dear Leader, everything McCain says about Iraq sounds like hysterical ranting these days. He might as well just stand in front of the camera and scream, tears welling in his eyes, "It IS getting better! It IS! Why won't you fuckers report how WELL things are going? I HATE you. I hate ALL of you!"
Oh wait - that's basically what he just did.
John McCain showed his true colors 4 years ago when he decided to become an Offical War Cheerleader, but even I am starting to feel a little bit sorry for him given what a living, breathing joke this once-proud man has become. The punchline? Half an hour after the Senators held their condescending, media-scolding press conference, 6 mortars fell on the market and six US soldiers were killed by roadside IEDs. I think they died of irony.
