Golf and Republicans

In the post below, I indicated my chagrin at the current GOP by saying, "L'il Mz Bootz: Yeah, verily, they (the GOP) doth piss me off to boot (yuck-yuck). But if weren't for them, we wouldn't have golf!"

Slyboots comments: "I thought that was the Scots. Are they considered Republicans? In the US sense?"

It was obvious that I had slighted the Scots, and since I would not EVER want a Scott pissed at me (I read Trainspotting and few other of Irvine Welch's books), I thought it advisable I rephrase my definitions of Golf, and its relationship to the Grand Ol' Party gang.

The Scots only created Golf to make better use of all that land between the crags and the sheep herds (other than worrying the sheep). White folks in general perfected the process by creating exclusive dominions on which to play the sport, finishing off the process in the States by putting black jockeys with lanterns on all the greens for evening play. These were real black jockeys, who had to stand there in 12 hour shifts.

Post slavery, this tradition was emulated by Republicans who, though they could no longer use real black jockeys, decided to create metal ones just for their driveways and front lawns. (Many Democrats were also involved in this chicanery, but at least they smart enough to paint their metal jockeys pink)

Not to be out done by former Southern aristocrats, current Republican activists further enhanced the illusion of exclusivity by inviting all the licensed contractors they knew to play in fund raiser tournaments for GOP candidates, who signed on for this self-deception whole-heartedly.

That’s probably one reason why Joe the Plumber is broke.

Say It Ain't So, Pup! Say It Ain't So!

Don't you just love all the mea culpas that conservative pundits --- as opposed to what Chris Buckley calls the "Right Wing Sanhedrin" --- are issuing now that McCain has so thoroughly drifted from his initial stance as a conservative libertarian?

I just caught that blog piece by Chris Buckley (son of the late, great William F.) where he indicated his support for Obama rather than McCain. Ironical, ain't it? In his blog piece he of course acknowledges his past support for McCain, even against the rabid dogs of the Right. But he is not alone. David Brooks of the NY Times is in the same boat.

Oh, and the reason he posted this was that he wanted to endorse Obama, mostly because he couldn't take it anymore. If you don't want to dirty your screen with right wing wanky web ads, I will quote you the significant part of his comment for me:

"A year ago, when everyone, including the man I’m about to endorse, was caterwauling to get out of Iraq on the next available flight, John McCain, practically alone, said no, no—bad move. Surge. It seemed a suicidal position to take, an act of political bravery of the kind you don’t see a whole lot of anymore.

But that was—sigh—then. John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.” This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.” Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?"

What indeed? And sadly this is the position McCain's tactics have put most conservative thinkers (note ejaculators) are going through now. They finally got the candidate they really wanted, but after his going through the looking glass, he came out someone they could not recognize. And this is the essential truth: the heart of Republicanism has been ripped out of the GOP by reactionaries and the intellectual grandkinders of Reaganism. Reagan managed to convey conservatism without rancour, or spleen in most cases. And though John McCain was never a lambykins on any issue, he was always respectful and attentive to his opposites across the aisle, and would often be the first to work with them to right some wrong that was obvious. Not that he was my cup of tea, but at least he resembled the kind of Republicans I grew up with, and could respect.

Frankly, I think this shit would even make Nixon spin like a top. And he used to work for McCarthy.

Right now, the GOP is about as far from the 'party of Lincoln' as it has ever been. Are Nelson and Happy Rockefeller freakin' out in GOP Heaven? What do guys like Kissinger really feel? As a little kid, I helped out with local GOP campaigns back in Jersey, mostly because I knew Republicans who were good and decent people, who listened to us when we started to rant about Viet Nam.

These were the guys Eisenhower was talking to when he said "... we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex... Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

An alert and knowledgeable citizenry ... that's something the current thought-schtuping goose-steppers at the GOP are desperately trying to eliminate. And why they are losing their intellectual support so rapidly.

Perhaps losing the White House in 2008 will be the best thing that can happen for Republicans in a long time. The rational can get control of the party back, or at least help return the GOP to the dignity it once had. I'd like to think that some day, there might be a Republican candidate that even I could support for the office, simply because there should always be an alternative to extremisim. And I would like to think that the party of my father exists for some reason other than what it is demonstrating itself to be right now. Considering who we are really going to be up against politically, economically and strategically in the near future, it might be important to keep this in mind:

Like Spock said, quoting that old, old Vulcan proverb: "Only Nixon could go to China."

EDITOR'S NOTE: Sadly, Chris Buckley's tenure (though brief) has ended at the National Review with his offer of resignation to the Editor. Apparently, even the libertarian son of the FOUNDER of the National Review is not allowed to stray from the Grand Ol' Party Line. Oh well, he writes great books, so he's better off. Stinks of fascism, don't it?

Kiddie Terror

Today I perused the London Times web site, and was greeted by one of the sickest stories I have read on the Al Qaeda Gang to date. See this link:

Link between child porn and Muslim terrorists discovered in police raids

How sick is that? I guess Osama Bin checkin' out the little peeps around the tent? Do they get 52 virgin infants when they get to Heaven? Or is that Hell?

Maybe I'm getting this all wrong, but isn't the West the Minion of Satan? Or are they hurting so bad they changed teams?

I also hear that Bin Laden is coaching Little League.

Undecided? ... Schmuck.

At what point in US history did we all decide that the 'undecided' voter is more important than any other consideration in the analysis of either candidates viability or legitimacy?

What is an undecided voter at this point in the election? There may be two types, though they don't follow party lines.


First, obviously, there is the twit. He/She/It can't make up their minds because they have no minds to make up. They are only marginally aware of economic issues or national security concerns, and most certainly have no formed opinions of any sort, other than a predilection for either daytime TV (preferably from a cable network of obscure fame, ex.: "347- The Animal Prostitutes Channel"); or ESPN Radio.






Second, the "Contrarian"; and there ain't a worse social disease out there. This person considers their opinions to be equated with gold bullion or sacred texts. They are critically concerned with these issues:

A) Themselves

B) Their Investments.

C) Their determination NEVER to approve of any government, spiritual or intellectual authority.

D) Their goal of never committing their personal time to anything outside their immediate interests.

E) Their eternal quest to NEVER pay any price, tax or compliment to a higher (they read that as 'lower') agency.

Visible indicators of the Contrarian? Pursed lips, like they just sucked on a lemon, when asked to make a decision ... on anything. Slacks or skirts often torn from their eternal perch on fence tops. Smirks whenever other breathing entities express passion, compassion, concern, anger or happiness in regards to ... again, anything. Exaggerated sighing and sense of self-worth.

As I had said above, this disease is not limited to those of any particular ethnicity, religion or level of income. Commonly referred to in medical and psychology texts in the Latin as Contrarianus Maximus, the malady was originally confined to France (with the exception of Provence and the Languedoc region), but soon migrated across the world to all nations.

And though there have been many concerted efforts to find a cure through medical research, fundraising and the "Walk Against Conceit" campaigns by the yogurt companies; still there is no progress. We are stuck with them, and the Monster-that-be-the-MEE-DEE-YA informs us that if the 'undecideds' aren't placated, primped, patted and pleased then All the Demons of Hell shall be loosed upon our over-opinionated selves.

Feck that. Feck THEM. If you haven't got an actual opinion yet on the issue of who's to be the next POTUS, then you are either a Twit or a Twat (as our Jolly English cousins like to say, not the nasty thang you be thinking). And if your are a twit, well ... you get a pass. Can't be helped.

But if your are a twat, beware! Your days are numbered. America and the rest of the world not only want change, they want ACTION. When the masters of the Universe gather at Haavard B School not to congratulate each other, but to figure out how THEY can contribute to Society's Infrastructure through "Social Investment", then the hour of doom for Contrarians is at hand.

In November, there will be a decision made, it will most likely be for Obama, and I am very sorry to tell you Contrarians that the rest of the nation --- nay, the world! --- expects you to get off the pot.

Or just go shit yourselves.

Books NO Movies

EDITOR'S COMMENT: Please note that the last paragraph of this post is nonsensical, as it has no bearing on reality. Bwana Jr commented was, " What Fecking Children of God movie?" I stand corrected: the movie I meant to say was "Children of Men". Duh.

I saw this great post from Willem De Mexico's blog, and had to agree with his premise that, " ... I understand that, as a reader, I'd love to see a book I enjoyed thrown out to the non-reading world - but, rarely, does it work."

Guillaume, I must agree with you. MY fav example of the inability to transcribe cool shite to film would be Neil Stephenson, especially his Baroque Cycle, once described to me as 'Harry Potter for Global Market freaks'. Well, I'm quoting a economics wanker there, so take it with a grain of salt.

Then there is the category of novels that should become films, and somehow do not. For instance, Madame de la Beantown and myself only read a few writers in a shared manner. I learned this lesson after she gave me a copy of The Notebook. I was forever cautious thereafter.

As this is definitely something that should NOT have become a movie, or any other piles of Sparks shite, I narrowed the list of 'shared reads' to protect myself. We settled on some really great stuff, and as for the middlin'/entertainin'/fav-rave-for-the-shitter, we settled first on Robert B. Parker (like eating a whole box of Oreos), and Mary Doria Russell , whose book The Sparrow and its sequel Children of God, proved quite fascinating to us both.

I bring her up because of a short correspondence I had with her and Barbara Hall, her (then) co-screenwriter. Hall was the producer of a CBS TV Series, "Joan of Arcadia". I don't really recall how I got into this thing, but I did. I just remember sending an email out of curiosity, and then getting slammed.

One line of discussion covered who exactly should play the lead character, a Puerto Riccan Jesuit ---

--- no, that is not an ethnic joke. I don't want to belabor this thang, so if you are really interested in all this sparrow story line, check this link) ---

---At one point, they moaned about the lack of any LA interest, even though the book sold a bizillion copies, etc. While discussing the casting idea, I mentioned that if you wanted a deep-yet-o-so-sensitive- guy, who could play Latin with gravitas and humor, and would put up with being raped by aliens, I suggested there was only one dude for the job; Johnny Depp. This caused a period of silence to ensue, ending with a message of joyous tumult ... Antonio Banderas was so interested he dropped some dough in their laps for development.

There was an extended disconnect with them after this (health problems for Mary, production problems for Barbara), that I lost contact. Mme. de la Beantown asked me some time later what was up, and I checked. Turns out BRAD PITT bought the rights to both books to combine them into a single film, and last I heard it was scheduled to release (?) in 2010.

What was all that shite for? I guess too many good novels become too many bad movies. Here's a thought... does anyone out there think the Children of God the movie was a good or bad version of the book?

Smoot-Hawleys of the Congress Unite!

Hey Gang, WICKED long time since I've been on this here thang. Since the world is going to hell in a hand truck, I thought I might throw in my two cents before the big asteroid hits.

The best words I've seen to date on this here sitchee-a-shun is from a couple of unlikely (for me ) sources:

First, David Brooks of the NYTimes --- see his column today.

Also, for a wee bit of comfort, try this from the Wall Street Journal's "Intelligent Investor" page. It might make lunch go down a little smoother.

It is almost fun to watch the GOPs fall down and go boom. I really can't believe that voting down the bailout was any kind of cogent plan on their part. Brooks said it best in his column (and he was trying to be kind):

"House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.

Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century. With this vote, they’ve taken responsibility for this economy, and they will be held accountable. The short-term blows will fall on John McCain, the long-term stress on the existence of the G.O.P. as we know it.

I’ve spoken with several House Republicans over the past few days and most admirably believe in free-market principles. What’s sad is that they still think it’s 1984. They still think the biggest threat comes from socialism and Walter Mondale liberalism. They seem not to have noticed how global capital flows have transformed our political economy. "

Read the rest if youget the chance.

These Guys Do Rock

Josh is a musician who has worked with me on event stuff here in Boston. This week, Josh was feeling poorly, really coming down with something, but soldiered on for the gig. He was concerned that his voice might be affected, and that he would not be able to perform for the crowd this weekend.

How big a gig, I asked? "Oh, probably 20,000 people or so."

Dude, what?

"Oh, we open for Cold Play this weekend at the Boston Garden." Oh.. ho-hum.

Dude, what the FAAK are you doing at this mingy gig if you're due there?

"Well, I was already signed for this and I couldn't not show."

OK, well hopefully he won't have to slum among us plebians in future!

SEE HIS VIDEO

Oh Cameraman, though art way too close!

I spent last week as a cameraman for webby broadcast of the AIA Conference up here in the ol' Beanpot, which is all about architecture and sheeeet. In my new life as Mr Videographer, I am once again get within a hair's of the semi-famous. But usually those sem-favs that have something significant to say, as opposed to covering celebs who have not much.
This picture has nothing to do with it, I just stuck it in for yucks. Oh, wait, I have it 'cause my late father-in-law's first serious girl friend was in the picture ... Helen Walker! Wanna here something weirder still? Helen Walker was pals with my second cousin, who's husband owned the Brown Derby. She was a Ziegfeld's Follies girl before they got married. Oh, and her husband was a wife beating dick. Glad he died.

Meanwhile, back in the Beanpot ...

One thing about this particular speech circuit is you get to see not only who may be coming up in the world of political and financial power, but those who have been on the world stage for a long time, and are getting ready to leave it. The comments of this latter group is often glossed over in the press, and set to the middle section of the major news coverage (i.e., the details of which only the most wonky of policy freaks pay much attention to).

But what I now see is that the 'hind sight' commentary can be one of the most valuable messages to any group of people who want to create and maintain significant social change!

Of those guys moving on this score, the first and last speakers of the AIA conference win hands down. The first was the guy who REALLY created Habitat for Humanity --- I know Jimmy Crack Carter gets top billing, but he picked up the ball from the O.G. --- Millard Fuller. Interesting guy, a Son of the South who decided that making bundles of bucks just wasn't enough, and ended up on a milk farm to learn humility. His speech is Session One (two parts), a LONG sermon but kinda worth it.

The closer was really kinda fantastic; Andrew Young, former Mayor of Atlanta, US Ambassador to the UN and personal aide to MLK, Jr. His message was really simple: Poor is the new Black. The division between the haves and the have-nots threatens the fabric of our society. Better get on it.

Oh, and if you watch you get to see some of my camera work. The down low shots were my favs.

OTHER THAN THAT<>

Monster Boy, Bwana Jr be home from Chilladelphia, and he has even worked on a few of my crews! I get to whip him when they reel in the 500' camera cables and say stuff like, "C'moan boah! Poot yo' back in to it!"

(Stolen from the old United Negro College Fund ads, remember?)

Obamamaniacs, Come Out!

Blooger Boogered my first version of this, so I will be more careful this time. Did Fox buy them?

It would appear that the rest of the world doth get the quandary we Americans are all facing, namely that the "BIG NEWS NETWORKS" are getting in the way of the political process. It is embarassing to read comment like this from the Times of London. And it may be high time for the "BIG NETWERRKS" to get the hell out of the way.

Particularly sad is this little snip from the debates last night, where the Anchors being heckled by the audience for their shallow performance.



Here are a few points to consider:

1. There is only a hair's breadth between most major policy viewpoints in Obama and Clinton's campaigns, which is bad for yellow journalism. The dependency on over played minor mistakes in both campaigns has brought the public discourse to a pitiful palaver.
2. National News organizations based on the American concept of ABC, NBC (not MSNBC) and CBS are clinically dead. Since they limit themselves to lowest-common-denominator thinking on what is important to the US voter (which shows you what they think of us hayseeds), they can't be trusted to deliver anything meaningful to the process. I think they should stick to celebrity interviews.
3. ABC news in particular seems to be huckstering for the Clintonistas. Which ain't no big surprise, considering who Stephanopoulos used to work for. But Gibson seems to be doing a clumsy two step to help McCain, the candidate from The Committee to Re-Invade Viet Nam (Sweeeeet, 30 Rock!)
4. Of course, MSNBC is still livin' in Obama-Land, but we'll cut them a break today.
5. And since Hilary isn't making any visible progress in acquiring actual voters, she is taking a page from the book of the Great American Revolutionist, John Reed by essentially telling the American Voter what they ought to think and when to think it. She will acquire all the superdelegates she can through back door maneuvers and co-opt the Democratic nomination process. It is dismaying that she wants to turn the Democratic Party into the Politburo...Can anyone say Trotskyite?
6. All politics is local, so if Hillary gets away with it, she'll be Pillary Clinton in the press forever more. She should really think about this.

Bizarro Addendum

(See the Lives of the Fathers of the Desert, and the authors quoted by A. Maury, Magie, 317.)

'In the fourth century the Messalians, believing themselves to be full of demons, were constantly blowing their noses, and spitting unceasingly, in their incredible efforts to expectorate these.'

Ibid AD NAUSEUM:

'If in God's infinite goodness there is room for the lowliest, if He ever seems to have a preference for such out of pity, why should not my ass be allowed in church? He has his defects, no doubt,—which makes him only the more like me. He is a sturdy fellow to work, but ... he is intractable and obstinate, in one word, he is my very counterpart.'

Bizarro Esoteric Quote o' the Day

'All primitive peoples start alike; this we see again and again in the accounts given by travellers. Man hunts and fights. Woman contrives and dreams; she is the mother of fancy, of the gods. She possesses glimpses of the second sight, and has wings to soar into the infinitude of longing and imagination. The better to count the seasons, she scans the sky. But earth has her heart as well. Her eyes stoop to the amorous flowers; a flower herself in her young beauty, she learns to know them as playfellows and intimates. A woman, she asks them to heal the men she loves.

Pathetic in their simplicity these first beginnings of Religion and Science! Later on, each province will be separated, we shall see mankind specialise—as medicine-man, astrologer or prophet, necromancer, priest, physician. But in these earliest days woman is all in all, and plays every part.'

The Sorceress

By Jules Michelet
as translated by Alfred Richard Allinson from the French

(original title "La Sorcière," Paris: E. Dentu [1862]).

Out of Stir

'Stir' - an old American euphemism for jail or prison. I title this 'Out of Stir' mostly because I can't think of much else to describe my 'quiet time' on my old site o' shite. I haven't posted since ... fish had feet!

I has been experiencing some changes in my life, not all fantastic let me assure you; but all the important stuff is still there... family, relationships and a regularly functioning brain wave.

I am no longer at that big ol' stinkie Institute. That went by the boards for me in a blur. I will not post about it, mostly because I fear their minions will come and execute me in me sleep. Which might be most profitable for the Missus, but would leave a hell of a mess at home. And I tend to enjoy breathing, thank you.

And though I do not slave for the Masters of Technology no more, I oddly have been called to do much work for the slave masters of Modern Medicine, followed shortly by the Fashionista Fascisti. SO ... lots of gory footage of surgery, and then even scarier ... Fashion Shows! (Who knew that athletic shoes could generate whole lines of clothing? and why??)

I was hoping that my first post after the thawing of the glaciers --- oops, that was to be a time-line joke, but it is sadly more true than any of us would like! --- would contain some hugely important comment on the malaise of our new century, or the relevance of the new politics, or even a short piece on how a high/low ratio transfer box and locking center and rear differentials add to the credentials of the Toyota - Land Cruiser Amazon VX 4.7 ... yeah, I lifted that last one. I bet SlyBoots will know from where!

But since this is my Opening Day, and there are now F-18s flying over my head here as I punch the keys, I will post with a whimper rather than a wow.

It's OK, I have learned to downsize my expectations!