Posted 3:15 PM by Angie Schultz

Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow!

Ah, looks as if we will have a white Christmas, or at least a white Christmas Eve. The weather has turned cold and snowy, and I bet we get two, maybe three millimeters before it's all done.

I live in Houston, where it rarely snows. It's snowing now, though, and there's a light dusting on the cars and rooftops. Some foolish natives are outside in the wind, marvelling at it. I made Niles take a picture of it, and that's as far as I'm willing to go.

It snowed here in January of '94, I remember, for about fifteen minutes. But that was during the day -- big wet flakes that barely survived contact with the ground.

I wish everyone a pleasant mid-winter work stoppage. Or, Merry Christmas, If That's OK.

Posted 5:52 PM by Angie Schultz

How Long Till It Becomes a Standard?

I think we have here the makings of the first Blogosphere Christmas carol. How promising is this line?:

oh my goodness oh my goodness oh my goodness, they are so going to arrest me! this is going to be great blogfodder!

We can call it "Sarah's Christmas in Jail". Sample lyrics:

He gave me my present
Wrapped up all nice for me.
Said, "Don't peek at it, now!
Put it under your tree."

Well, I got to the airport,
And the lines were so long.
Thought, "I don't need to check in.
I can carry this on."

...

Down at my feet
There's a bomb-sniffing dog[*]
God, they're going to arrest me!
This'll be great on the blog!

Gotta call up my man
And arrange for my bail
How long will this take?
Is there WiFi in jail?

...

[*]Bomb-sniffing dog is artistic license, 'coz it rhymes with blog

This would make the perfect country-and-western song. (Steve Goodman, eat your heart out.)

I suggest we get someone competent, though. Maybe Dr. Frank can write the first punk C&W song.

Via the criminal element at Silent Running.

Posted 10:25 AM by Angie Schultz

Mystery Gift

Hmmm! This is odd. I got a box from Best Buy today: the documentaries Trekkies and Trekkies 2, on DVD. But there's nothing to say who sent it! I tried to look up the order status, but that requires a last name and the phone number listed with the credit card company. The list of suspects is very short; I suppose I could try each of their names and phone numbers in turn.

It will not be anybody reading this blog, because a) no one does, and b) they wouldn't know where to send stuff, and neither would Best Buy.

I have Trekkies on VHS already, but...well, that's on VHS. (I better start getting rid of all my tapes. Soon you won't be able to give 'em away.)

So, W00T! I guess. Until I track you down, whoever you are, this thank you (which you won't read) will have to do.

UPDATE: It was my brother. Got it on the first try. I'm a little disappointed the explanation was so prosaic. He did not mean to be incognito; he says Best Buy just goofed up.

Speaking of goof-ups, and free things in the mail, we got our order from the Swiss Colony the other day. We always go overboard and get a big ol' pile of sugary stuff, and a Beef Log, Baby (you know, once Michele posted this song -- can't find the exact post now -- and I thought that was a real story about her son; I don't watch South Park). Anyway, we found that they had not sent us an item, but did send us something we didn't ask for: Olde Worlde Cookiese.

Niles called them up to ask what the hell? (we wondered if maybe they were out of the booze-stuffed chocolates we ordered, and they sent these instead) and they said they just goofed, they'd send the hooch-truffles, and meantime we could keep the cookies. We don't like 'em, much, but we don't look free cookies in the mouth, either. We pop 'em in our mouths! Sweet!

Posted 3:28 PM by Angie Schultz

Christmas Present Peeking in the 21st Century

Hey, kids! Here's a great new way to snoop out those Christmas presents before Christmas! First, it's essential that you use your parents' computer. Tell 'em yours is old and doesn't have framiwhoozis enabled; they'll never know the difference.

Next, go to Amazon.com and do a search on your favorite artists or albums, such as, oh, say, Martin Denny's Forbidden Island/Primitiva, which I'm sure is all the rage with the under-18 set.

If your parents have purchased this from Amazon, there'll be a big message at the top: [Your parent's name], you have purchased this item on [date].

Cool, huh? I found this out inadvertantly while using my boyfriend's computer to listen to some stuff, since mine doesn't have sound enabled. Ah, technology... You kids have it easy. We had to look for our presents at the back of the closet, underneath Dad's Playboy stash.

Posted 11:37 AM by Angie Schultz

Swift Swings into Orbit

After a three-day delay, Swift was finally launched on Saturday, Nov 20. We watched the launch from KARS Park I, across the Banana River from launch complex 17 -- about 3.5 miles away, according to Yahoo's maps. (KARS is the Kennedy Athletic, Recreational and Social Organization. They have a nice little park there, with picnic tables and pavilions and an American Legion hall and real bathrooms.) There was a roach coach there to sell drinks and snacks, but we were there so short a time we didn't buy any. A group was also selling souvenirs (T-shirts, caps, and patches) at a table under the tent. Niles got his Christmas shopping done early, he told me.

There had been, we heard, 280 people on our Tuesday tour of the Space Center, but there didn't seem to be nearly that many on Saturday (many probably had to go home). They set up a tent on the river bank with a TV, which broadcast the launch while big speakers relayed the launch control chatter. At T-4 minutes there was a planned ten-minute hold, which got stretched a bit to 16 minutes. The launch therefore went off six minutes late, at 12:16pm EST.

As with most of the interesting events of my life, I saw this one through a viewfinder. Niles was forced to rely on his old-fashioned film camera, since his digital camera's best zoom only showed two little bumps on top of the river. I of course brought my beloved Canon AE-1, which I think is about 23 years old now. I was able to get a pretty good view with my new (to me; I bought it used) 75-200 mm zoom. I believe this was the first chance I had to use it. The new polarizer I had to buy came in handy: at one polarization the rocket looked like a gray smudge against the blue-gray sky; 180 degrees from that brought out the black-and-white paint job.

I bought Kodachrome 64 slide film to shoot it with, and then remembered that I'd be using the telephoto lens, and 64 wasn't nearly fast enough. I ended up using Kodak "High Definition" 400. I'd rather have had their professional grade film, but they don't sell that everywhere, and we never had time to go to a camera store in Florida. I had to use a 1/500 shutter speed, because I didn't have a big enough aperture for 1/1000. We'll have to see how they came out.

When the countdown got to zero, nothing much happened for a second. Then there was a cloud of smoke (or steam), and a little bit later, a flame. From the briefing film we saw, Niles and I both expected that the rocket would be up and gone too fast to take more than maybe two pictures, max, but I got off several before it became just a bright spark on top of the vapor trail (and I have no auto winder).

A little to my surprise, we were able to see the boosters separate. Well, I, personally, didn't see them, because I took my eyes off the viewfinder long enough to shout to Niles, "Hey, do you suppose we'll be able to see the booster separation?" and when I looked again there were three thin little trails falling back toward the earth. I had forgotten how many boosters there were; I think the Delta can take as many as nine, and I thought this had six, but there were only three.

After a minute or so there's no point in taking more pictures of the rocket, so we took picturesque views of the vapor trail against a palm tree and boat dock, and pictures of the crowd. The winds soon dispersed the trail, which was kind of disappointing. The day had been beautiful, with a few high clouds. Off over the ocean to the east were a bank of clouds which provided a fetching backdrop to the rocket, when the polarization was right.

And, after that, it was sort of an anti-climax (as you might expect). Some people hung around, but we left. There was nothing to see, and we could check on the web for subsequent events.

So far, everything looks good -- the spacecraft has separated and unfurled its solar panels. It'll take about a month to check out the telescope. See here for the events leading up to the launch, and here for a wrap-up article. It has a lot better picture than I got! (Of course, that was taken by someone from Boeing, on the scene. Next launch I'm getting one of these babies (and a mule to carry it).

Posted 6:34 PM by Angie Schultz

The Satellite that Swings

Greetings from Titusville, Florida. My association with the seamy underworld of gamma-ray astronomy has been richly rewarded. I'm down here at Kennedy Space Center for the launch of the Swift satellite. We had a bus tour of the Center today, which consisted of driving around a lot of identical parcels of swamp land while the tour guides pointed out the sights: And here's pad 32A, where in 1962 the... VROOOM! around another corner...And over there, on pad 128C, is where the famous... I'm fairly sure there's really only one launching pad, which they drove around several times.

After the tour, we had a "briefing" from several people in charge of various things, including Anne Kinney of NASA, whose title is apparently "Director, Universe Division". So don't piss her off. The guy from Boeing showed us an "expanded diagram" of the Delta rocket which will lift Swift. "Notice I don't say 'exploded diagram'," he said. "That's a phrase we don't like to use in our business." Har!

We also got to hear the Swift song, which goes, in part:


We know that gamma ray explosions happen randomly all over the sky.
(It's like a lottery: a ticket for each square degree)
You see a FLASH! and then there's not another till about a day has gone by.
(But that depends upon detector sensitivity)


How I've longed for a song acknowledging the role of detector sensitivity! Another part:


Swift is the satellite that swings
Onto those brightly bursting things,
To grab the multiwavelength answer of what makes them glow.


Swift, the satellite that swings!

Go here to read about Swift, and hear an MP3 of the song. The singing is actually good.

UPDATE: Rats, the launch has been delayed due to a problem with the range safety system, i.e. the self-destruct (in case the rocket should go astray). It's that damned Gary Seven again. He thinks everything is an orbiting thermonuclear device. Next launch opportunity is tomorrow noon.

Posted 1:56 PM by Angie Schultz

Is Satire Dead?

Is satire, like Arafat, on life support until we can find the numbers to the Swiss bank accounts?:

The semi-fictional Rick Cranky, on this site:

Well, frankly, I'm hoping a comet will hit the earth. Ideally, it would only strike a glancing blow, and obliterate the United States. But if the whole world has to go it's not too big a price to pay to rid ourselves of the mephitic influence of money in politics.

Penny Greenberg, in the San Francisco Chronicle:

My only consolation is that someday this planet will be a dead cinder in the universe and all the stupidity, greed, and intolerance and their sad, sad consequences will be lost to all memory.

YOU make the call.

Via Best of the Web.

Posted 11:22 AM by Angie Schultz

Ted Rall Makes Good Point: A Sign of the Apocalypse?

Now that I've been inducted into Chimpy McHitlerburton's Undead Christian Army of Jesusland, I am on the lookout for signs of the Apocalypse. I believe I have found one: I am in complete agreement with this Ted Rall cartoon.

For those unwilling to risk contracting the Cooties of Impurity by clicking the link, Ted compares the U.S. to a classroom in which mentally handicapped children are "mainstreamed" by being placed in a classroom with the unspecial (c.f. the other week's "For Better or Worse", a comic deemed completely wholesome despite being produced in the United States of Canada).

Ted goes on to detail how this well-meaning experiment goes awry, since it not only places an extra burden on the other students, but also slows their pace of learning and blurs the difference between the achievment of the normal kids, and the necessarily lesser achievments of the handicapped ones. The danger is that the distinction will blur so much that the slowest learners will become the teachers!

(Speaking of achievments, notice that in the second panel the kids are studying relativity. The lower equation is a Lorentz mass transformation. Wonder who scribbled that on Ted's arm so he could put it in the strip?)

Ted is completely right in this. In the Sixties, many people began to believe that entire modes of inquiry had been closed off by dogmatic adherence to tradition. Those people appealed to their colleagues' and the public's spirit of free inquiry and fair play to get non-traditional viewpoints and methods accepted into the academy.

The problem was, of course, that many of these non-traditional viewpoints were rubbish. Once in, however, they were soon entrenched, driven out only when changing fads replaced them by other rubbish. Eventually it got so that any efforts to separate wheat from chaff was met by indignation toward the anthropocentric nutritional-imperialist mindset that decreed that wheat was more useful than chaff.

Which is where we find ourselves today.

My only surprise is that Ted Rall, of all people, would display such insight and spirit of self-criticism as to...

What? What are you all looking at? Was it something I said?

Via Tim "Divine Pool Cue to the Eye of the Unrighteous" Blair

Posted 10:42 AM by Angie Schultz

Religious Extremism in America

Michele has something to say about the kind of people who voted for Bush. In the comments to the post, MikeR (among others) is nervous about the looming influence of Bush's "core" supporters, the religious right. I pointed out that Michele and I (and many others like us) are now Bush's "core" supporters.

However, there's something that has to be mentioned to clarify the "fringe" nature of the religious element.

Below are the percentages of votes for the two main presidential candidates, alongside the percentage of the vote for the same-sex marriage ban in each state which passed in every single case by large margins, as you will see.

State	% Bush	% Kerry	Winner	% for ban
Arkansas	54	45	Bush	75
Georgia	59	41	Bush	76
Kentucky	60	40	Bush	75
Michigan	48	51	Kerry	59
Mississippi	60	40	Bush	86
Montana	69	39	Bush	66
North Dakota	63	36	Bush	73
Ohio	51	49	Bush	62
Oklahoma	66	34	Bush	76
Oregon	48	52	Kerry	57
Utah	71	27	Bush	66

(All marriage ban ballot measures taken from this CNN page. Presidential results taken from this CNN page, but you have to keep selecting states. Both results are from yesterday, November 3, 2004.)

So you see that in every state except Montana and Utah, Bush supporters were outweighed (in percentage) by ban supporters. Many Kerry supporters voted for the bans, sometimes by quite a lot. As a caveat, bear in mind that not everyone who voted in the presidential race voted on the bans (and, in principle, vice-versa). I was too lazy to check this for every state, but in Ohio, approximately 288,000 more people voted in the presidential race. Even assuming (for no good reason) they would all have voted against the ban that doesn't budge the numbers much.

Since I haven't been keeping up on this issue, I wasn't sure how many other states had passed similar bans. This page gives brief descriptions of the laws in all 50 states, and I was surprised to find that there are only a handful of states that have not banned them. Massachusetts explicitly permits them, New Jersey and Vermont allow same-sex domestic partnerships, and New Mexico, New York, and Rhode Island have no laws on the matter. New Mexico, in particular, seems to be trying to ignore the whole issue.

Most of these are legislative bans, which means the legislature giveth, and the legislature can taketh away, too. But there are some which are amendments to the state constitution, which (generally) require a plebiscite. Here are the results of the five states which (as far as I could tell) already had constitutional bans:

State	Year Passed	% for ban
Alaska	1998	66*
Louisiana	2004	78
Missouri	2004	71
Nebraska	2000	70
Nevada	2000	70

[*] Roughly. The linked article said the measure had passed by 2-1.

These margins are all huge. Despite the protestations of some, what you see here is not the influence of the religious right, but of the religious middle. If you define "religious right" by the gay marriage ban, then about 2/3 of the country is the "religious right". (Of course, in reality it's more -- how you say? -- nuanced.) Those of you who are against such bans (like me) can count yourselves on the fringe.

And, just in time, here's a column by Arnold Kling which I believe is refuted by the above information. He may well be right about about the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling spawning the 11 referenda on same-sex marriage bans, though.

UPDATE:When I wrote the above, I was a little worried that maybe the raw numbers did not support my conclusion. See, it might just have been possible that Kerry supporters made sure they voted against Bush, then left the voting booth with satisfaction, forgetting in their triumph to vote down the marriage amendment. But I was too lazy to run those numbers.

Fortunately, Jack at Captain Yips Secret Journal was more industrious. He has an Excel spreadsheet showing the number of votes for Bush and Kerry in each of the 11 states, plus the total for the two of them, and the number of votes for and against the marriage bans, plus the total for that issue. The numbers show that my conclusions about the people voting for the same sex marriage bans hold up: lots of them were Kerry supporters.

Using Jack's spreadsheet, I looked at the results assuming that the excess number of voters (presidential voters - ban voters) had indeed meant to vote against the ban. The results: the bans were still passed by large margins, except in Montana, where the ban was narrowly defeated. By the way, in Utah and Oregon, more people voted on the ban issue than voted for president. This is still true, it turns out, if you include all the minor-party candidates as well. Hmmm.

Posted 7:56 PM by Angie Schultz

Bribe or Twist

Those wacky libertarians at Samizdata have unearthed a charming nugget from the British media, specifically the Mail on Sunday. In the "Review" section, a Peter Oborne has an article subtly entitled "RIP Democracy 1776-2004". The pull quote:

America thinks it can tell us about freedom and how the world should be run -- yet its own leader will be chosen by a handful of ignorant bigots who only listen to smears and lies...

Rubbish: most British journalists can't vote in US elections. Brian Micklethwait, who discovered this, is relieved to be unable to find it on line.

Brian also points to a round-up of British TV shows about the election at sunny Blognor Regis. Peter Oborne makes an appearance there, too:

Political commentator Peter Oborne visits America to assess the nation's democratic credentials ahead of the forthcoming presidential election. Joining the campaign trail, he discovers that the process is something of a sham as the most ill-informed people in the country ultimately decide who is to become the most powerful man in the world

I'm a little astonished that the British market can sustain so many shows on a foreign election. A goodly portion of my support for Bush is just a desire to see these people's heads explode if he wins. You think there's any way to get it on Pay Per View?


You cannot hope to bribe or twist
(thank God!) the British journalist.
But, seeing what the man will do
unbribed, there's no occasion to.

--- Humbert Wolfe

Posted 7:52 PM by Angie Schultz

Liverpool, Leipzig Precincts Reporting In

Via the InstaPundit hive-mind we find this very amusing and informative Guardian article on the trials and travails of foreign media covering the US election.

The article begins with the gripping tale of a Sky News crew in Arizona:

The Slash U ranch near Tucson, Arizona, 4am on a grim Wednesday. It's dark, there's a 30mph wind and cold, heavy rain...Having rejected a windswept field as a possible site for their report, the five-man team from Sky have settled on a barn. This is partly to protect their kit from the rain but also because the tackroom is straight out of Bonanza, loaded with cowboy saddles, reins, crops and horse feed and the rancher is wearing a stetson...Outside, in the satellite van, Dan Williams, Sky's Washington news editor, is watching anxiously on a monitor as US correspondent Andrew Wilson mounts one of the rancher's horses ready to deliver his piece to camera.

At five minutes to live, all the power goes out but they get it back with 60 seconds to spare. Yawn. To hell with that. I want to see Andrew Wilson on the horsey. That wouldn't be, like, hokey and everything, would it? From the sophisticated European media? Naaaaah.

It's a man's life in the foreign news corps:

During the 2000 election, a reporter from a German newspaper asked Karen Hughes, Bush's senior adviser, a question. Half way through her answer, something struck her. "Who do you work for?" she asked. "A German newspaper," he began. "Then what am I wasting my time talking to you for?" she asked, somewhat rhetorically, and turned on her heel. One Kerry aide was equally specific. "To us," he told the Washington Post last week, "foreign media are about as useful as lice."

She should have said, "as useful as tits on a boar", for that colorful sound bite.

(Not long ago, the Guardian's Jonathan Freedland grumbled that there were still "no votes in Leipzig", though there oughta be, by golly.)

What's more galling to international superstar anchors is how important tiny local cable stations and newspapers suddenly become...Last week, for instance, some overseas broadcasters began talks to gain access to Carl Rove, the mastermind behind the Bush campaign. He blew them off for lunch with the chief reporter of the Ohio Sentinel.

Maybe if you spelled his name right...

This just makes you weep, don't it? Imagine John Simpson brushed aside for hamburgers with Lucas McWeewiddle of the Podunk Commercial-Advertiser. Tears are running down my face as I type.

Moving on from the border ranch, the team [from Sky] hooked up with a gang of Tombstone vigilantes who head out to well-known immigrant routes, armed to the teeth. These people seem unlikely media stars. For one thing, their activities are very close to illegal.

Wow! Illegal! Not like those Iraqi "freedom fighters" and Palestinian "activists", eh?

Presented without comment:

On Monday, Woods [again of Sky] was at Love Park in Pennsylvania for Bill Clinton's appearance alongside Kerry - a bizarre spectacle in a long, thin park packed with 80-90,000 ecstatic Democrats who only had a sideways view of their idol as the stage had been rotated 90 degrees to face the media.

Here's the most harrowing part of all, when the intrepid British journos descend into the very Belly of the Beast:

...Williams and Wilson are filming in a TV evangelist's studio, asking Dr Richard Roberts about the Christian vote. "I have been preaching that we need to support a man of God who governs well," Roberts intones, whilst cynical London cameramen struggle to avoid blaspheming as they wire up their kit and drop things on their feet...The crew are slightly suspicious of Roberts when the studio manager takes them round the studio, showing off the digital editing suites. "That set up would cost several million dollars," cameraman Martin whispers. "Where's he getting the money?"

Uh, he makes it selling heroin to Queen Elizabeth? Extracts it from the pineal glands of innocent Muslim babies? Withholds it from the wages of 5,000 exquisite Balinese hookers who slave in the fleshpots of Dubuque in worship of him?

Well, probably not. I'm guessing people give it to him. Of their own free will! Shocking, I know.

Posted 2:29 PM by Angie Schultz

Voting Report

I voted this morning in reddest Houston.

Based on reports on numerous blogs, I expected long lines (in the rain). But the only person ahead of me was Niles.

I was a bit disappointed. There was no one electioneering, no protestors, no moonbats, nothing. There were about thirty Bush signs, signs for various other candidates, and one lone Kerry, that we saw. I did mention that this was reddest Houston, right?

They checked my voter card and ID; since this is my first time voting here, I brought my passport as well as my driver's license. Can't be too careful.

Every other time I've voted (and this is since 1980), we've used the Hollerith card voting things. That's because, of course, I've only lived in economically deprived areas, like Silicon Valley. This time we used the eSlate, which was fine. It had nice big instructions, which was good because I didn't think of bringing my reading glasses.

Considering that they have all the space in the world to put the instructions on, the ballot was a little confusing. The first screen you come to asks if you want to vote a straight ticket. But if you don't want to do that, what do you do? It doesn't say. Knowing that it's hard to screw up a ballot, I pressed the "next" button, and that turned out to be the right thing.

There's also a "cast ballot" button. You'd think that it would work whenever you were done, but you have to click your way to the end of the ballot, until you see the big red "cast ballot" button on the screen, and then actually push the button. (It's not a touch screen. The "cast ballot" button is actually a big red button.) That's all to the good, I suppose, that you can't accidentally press it, but the way they have it now is a little confusing.

(Of course, if I were designing it, I'd have everything explained in minute detail, and people's eyes would glaze over and they'd never read the instructions.)

Here's a FAQ on the eSlate from Travis County. One of the questions is about the a paper trail in case of challenges. The answer hems and haws a bit before finally getting around to saying that, yes, the eSlate will produce a paper trail. The hemming and hawing makes me suspicious.

I'm not sold on this here now newfangled electronic voting business, especially ones that rely on "ballots" that never were. It's just too easy (in principle) to hack a machine. Even punch card ballots leave an actual card, touched by the voter's own hands. So even if someone has programmed the card reader to falsely record the votes, a machine programmed by a different person will still be able to read the original intentions.

Speaking of ballots, it's worth pointing to this old post of mine, on the occasion of the last election, discussing the film Tuesday in November. Made during the election of 1944, it was intended to educate people overseas about American democracy. It's hard to imagine now, but the State Dept. -- or, in this case, War Dept. -- used to churn out these kinds of things for informational purposes overseas. Or, if you'd rather, to gull them into believing that the US was a real democracy instead of a warmongering fascist plutocracy of oil barons and froth gibber spew...

The actual film, Tuesday in November, is available here. The main image I took from it was of a man marking a paper ballot the size of a newspaper. Must've been unwieldy in the voting booth. Wonder what he'd make of the little eSlate.

(Here's the eSlatesite again. Note that the DAU 5000, for disabled voters, has the following whizbang feature:

Special interfaces for the physically challenged, including head movement switches and "sip and puff" switches (that allow severely physically impaired voters to cast their ballot using only their breath).

Man.)

We voted in the elementary school just down the street. The room we were in was divided in half, and there were a bunch of kids, apparently eating, at tables on the other side of some dividers. I don't know what the room is normally used for, but paintings on the walls showed a map of the world with several flags, and groups of people in various national costumes, including Australians (I found this amusing for some reason; I gathered this was supposed to represent the nationalities of kids going to the school, at least at one time). But around the top of the room was painted the words and music to -- oh, the horror! -- "It's a Small World"! How can they inflict this terror on tiny, helpless children? Someone call the UN! (Er, well, maybe not. That's probably the UN anthem.)

Posted 1:47 PM by Angie Schultz

Happy Birthday, Codger Butt!

A certain blogger's certain boyfriend is turning a certain age that begins with 4 and ends with 0, thus entering into the realm of old age. (Your blogger has already reached this milestone.)

He's all tricked out today to celebrate his transition to a new stage of life:

Hawaiian shirt? Check
Shorts? Check
Dark socks? Check
Sandals? Check

If I can sneak up on him with the digital camera, I might be able to post evidence of his oldfartdom. (Er, except he's been dressing like this for about a decade, now.)

Posted 9:20 AM by Angie Schultz

News Channel Surfing

Well, there's something you don't see every day, Chauncey. (top photo)

CNN's Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson (lower right corner) provide one of the most lighthearted moments during debate week when, having co-hosted an edition of Crossfire from Beaumont Pavilion in Brookings Quadrangle, they crowd-surf through a pack of jubilant students.

In the penultimate photo you can see a sign supporting a dark horse third party candidate: Pujols for Prez.

Posted 6:00 PM by Angie Schultz

Love in the Time of Chlamydia

The other day I wrote about the one plot of the modern novel:

1) Dullard is disappointed in his mundane life.
2) Dullard blames this on family/spouse/Society, rather than dullardism.
3) Dullard turns to substance abuse/wild sex.
4) Astonishingly, this fails to cure him of his dullardism, and his disappointment remains. Unless he kills himself.

So yesterday I saw this article, about how Gabriel García Márquez has published his first book in a decade, and made some last-minute changes because pirates were already selling half-price knockoffs on the street. The book is titled Memories of My Melancholy Whores:

The long-awaited novella explores love, sex and life by telling the story of a male journalist who decides to celebrate his 90th birthday by having sex with a young virgin.

Awwww.

"...the novel celebrates ... the complete happiness of someone who over the years has learned that there's more pleasure in choosing to say no than there is in satisfying all of one's carnal desires," R.H. Moreno-Durán, a Colombian writer, told the Colombian weekly newspaper Cambio."

The Guardian elaborates:

Set in Colombia in the mid-1950s, it tells how an elderly journalist decides he must celebrate his 90th birthday by taking the virginity of a 14-year-old prostitute. But, when he is presented with the ideal candidate, she has been drugged by the brothel madam and refuses to wake up.

Damn. Does no one understand the meaning of quality anymore?

For nights on end he observes, strokes, kisses, reads to, sings to and sleeps beside the always dormant object of what becomes a tormented, jealous, but life-giving, love.

"Sex is the consolation that you are left with when you do not attain love," he concludes, having kept a record of more than 500 prostitutes he has slept with.

(Nights on end? What did they give that poor child?)

Which reminds me of an alternate ending to the modern novel:

4) Dullard learns something everyone else figured out decades before. Author is proud of his insight.
5) Other dullards swoon over the novelist's genius, award him pretentious literary prizes.
6) Public yawns, buys more Stephen King novels.
7) Stephen King sells enough books to buy Colombia.

Posted 7:03 PM by Angie Schultz

Signs and Portents

Right now the skies darken over New York, and the earth trembles, for the Red Sox are 8-1 over the Yankees in the AL playoffs. Tomorrow the Cardinals play the Astros for the NL championship.

If the Cards and Yanks both win, this will make Michele Catalano my blood enemy.

But if they both lose, you know what that means: a Texas-Massachusetts World Series.

The geopolitical implications are formidable.

I can't get to Michele's blog. She's probably out buying more voodoo dolls, or sacrificial black chickens. Of course, it's only the fourth inning.

UPDATE: I tried to post this last night, but I couldn't get through to Blogger. Couldn't get to Michele's blog either. All I got was a restful white page. I figured that was the color of the nice, soft room they'd put her in.

But, today she seems OK with it. I suspect heavy sedation.

Although a Texas-Massachusetts brawl would've been interesting, we'll have to settle for letting the Cards win the Series. Woo.

Posted 9:42 AM by Angie Schultz

Suffering from Writers' Bloc

Or, The 2004 Presidential Election Viewed as a Series of Vignettes from a Wretched Roman a Clef.

Slate asked a number of novelists who they were voting for, and why. You get one guess as to who's getting novelists' votes at a rate of about 8:1. Use it wisely.

I've not heard of most of these people. I hate mainstream (i.e., non-genre) novels. Modern novels seem to have a single plot:

1) Dullard is disappointed in his mundane life.
2) Dullard blames this on family/spouse/Society, rather than dullardism.
3) Dullard turns to substance abuse/wild sex.
4) Astonishingly, this fails to cure him of his dullardism, and his disappointment remains. Unless he kills himself.

This first quote gave me an idea:

Dan Chaon: Like many people, I'm casting a vote for Anyone but Bush...[H]e seems truly, frighteningly dangerous and completely without scruples. I'm alarmed by his administration's attacks on civil liberties, by the deliberate lies that brought us into a poorly planned war, by the gleeful disregard for the environment, by the social policies--the tax cuts...the ugly, merciless No Child Left Behind educational policy; the reckless budget deficit...I find myself particularly repelled by Bush's professed "Christianity," even as his administration repudiates every value that Christ represents. He's probably not the Antichrist, but he comes as close as I've seen in my lifetime.

I wish he'd have specified the "ugly, merciless" parts of No Child Left Behind, I thought to myself. Maybe they would make better reading than modern novels. And with that, horror was unleashed into the world. Are you ready for some ham-handed satire? Then let's begin:

==========================================================

The chimp-like face of President Evil lit with mad genius. "We shall demand 'adequate yearly progress!' he thundered, slamming his iron fist upon the proposed text of the ugly, merciless education bill. "Adequate yearly progress...adequate yearly progress..." The phrase ran around the room, whispered by the Zombie Legislators as they rocked to the chant. "Adequate yearly progress..." Looking closely, Senator Pure could see that the paper bore faint scorch marks where the President's hand had touched it.

Amy Tan: I'm voting for Kerry, because I have a brain and so does he.

How can I not vote for a candidate like Kerry, who respects the Constitution, who respects the need for health care, and who is strong and rational enough to defend our country but without arm pumping and high fives when the bombs fall on another country?

"My fellow Americans," the President began in his most velvety tone, "I come to you tonight on all broadcast, cable, and satellite stations -- as well as all newspapers, magazines, websites, blogs, and cocktail napkins -- to announce the utter obliteration of Frangipanistan," and here his voice began to ring with the sounds of all Hell's bells, "a rogue state whose president refused to quit sheltering terrorist elements, and who, moreover, insulted my tie at the recent Summit of Central Asian States Who Better Damn Well Toe the American Line If They Know What's Good for Them." His voice rose to a chimp-like scream, "The United States Will! Not! Be! Mocked! USA! USA! USA!"

Rick Moody: My conscience, at the time, dictated that American party politics were inherently corrupt...

It became self-evident, I think, that the Bush presidency is the most corrupt in modern history.

Since it's now abundantly clear that Nader's reform message has been deracinated by his narcissistic Republican-financed campaign...

"Hello, and welcome to Punch, Counterpunch. I'm your host, Caesar Coxcomb, and tonight we look at the campaign through the eyes of some notable novelists. Our first guest is Rick Cranky. Rick, what is your assessment of the campaign so far?

"Corrupt, indubitably, indisputably, irreparably corrupt. Both major parties have polluted the so-called democratic process beyond any hope of recovery or redemption. Our political system is nothing but a giant sucking chest wound, a suppurating sore, a vast bowl of pus..."

"So, you think the only hope is in alternative candidacies, like that of Mr. Nadir?"

"I used to, but I read the other day that he actually accepted money -- dirty, filthy, putrid money -- to run his campaign. So he just as soiled as the rest of them."

"I see. So what's your solution?"

"Well, frankly, I'm hoping a comet will hit the earth. Ideally, it would only strike a glancing blow, and obliterate the United States. But if the whole world has to go it's not too big a price to pay to rid ourselves of the mephitic influence of money in politics."

Joyce Carol Oates: Like virtually everyone I know, I'm voting for Kerry. Our culture has become politicized to a degree that verges upon hysteria.

"Well, thank you for those thoughts, Rick. And now to Candy Cornes. Will you tell us who you'll be voting for, Candy?"

"I'm proud to say I'll be voting for Senator Pure, Caesar. I just hope the election isn't stolen, like it was the last time."

"What makes you think it was stolen, Candy?"

"Well, no one voted for Evil! At least, no one I know. Not a single soul voted for him, so it must have been stolen!"

"In a recent column for the Washington Pillar, you said that you could not remember a more vicious political campaign. Can you explain?"

"Do I have to explain, Caesar? It's all the fault of the lying, murderous, thieving brown-shirted Nazi thugs of President Evil's party that there is so little civility in today's politics."

Diane Johnson: Because I'm not in the U.S. much of the time, I am apt to see current events as presented in the foreign press, and they differ a lot from the way things are spun here. From there, it is painful to see our country dragged through the mud because it has a leader who appears foolish, rash, and arrogant. Even the English, our supposed allies, sneer. Guns, the auto, torture, and war. One can't disagree with the things others say about Bush, but up till now, the rest of the world tends not to blame the American people (we didn't elect him).

After the election, who knows? I understand that lots of people don't care what the rest of the world thinks, but they ought to.

And, our world reputation aside, I find Mr. Bush embarrassing.

"Oh Ms. Pure! Ms. Pure!" Polly Pure turned at the sound of her name. "Oh, I am just so glad you could come to Europe speak to us ex-pats on behalf of your brother."

"Well, I--"

"Oh, I do hope he wins, instead of that terrible, terrible Evil man! It's getting so I can't go to a single soiree. Everywhere I go people are always telling me how much they hate Americans, and it's all because of our Evil."

"Well, I--"

"Oh, McDonalds, Starbucks, Robitussin!"

"Well, I--huh?"

"You know, we Americans living abroad sometimes forget that the people at 'home' only see things through the right-wing dominated press. They don't get to see the unspun, unvarnished, ugly truth in the foreign media, like we do."

"Well, I--"

"Why, the other day I was at a cocktail party and this man I'd never met came up to me and asked if I was an American, and well I tell you, I knew what was coming but I said, 'Yes I am', and he went on to lecture me for twenty minutes about how rude Americans were, and how arrogant, and ignorant, and well, what can you say to that?"

"Well, I--"

"I mean you can't deny it, can you? Because we are rude, aren't we? And arrogant. Oh, how distressing. This man had the most beautiful manners, and he was very informative. He was telling me how people ended up in Guanamera because of the Patriotic Act. You know, he turned out to be a Saudi prince! He said they never have terrorism there, just a little problem with bootleggers. Oh, look, here comes Jonathan Frantic."

Jonathan Franzen: Kerry, of course. He's the candidate whose defeat Osama Bin Laden (if he's alive) is praying for. I trust him not to pour additional gasoline on the fires that Bush has set overseas. Also, since he's a Democrat, I trust him to exercise a modicum of fiscal sanity and to show a little compassion for the unlucky. Also, his wife is hot hot hot. She'd be a first lady for the ages.

"Oh, Mr. Frantic! What a pleasure to meet you! I loved your books."

"Yeah, yeah, of course. Glad you could make it here to campaign for your brother. I'm especially looking forward to his health care plan and his education plan and his military plan, oh, and some damned fiscal responsibility for a change!"

"Well, I think--"

"Say, your sister-in-law is really hot. I love the way she doesn't comb her hair. Is she seeing anyone, that you know of?"

"I BEG YOUR PARDON!"

"Oh, hey, no need to explain. The caviar always gives me gas, too."

Jane Smiley: I am voting for John Kerry. Would George Bush steal the election if he thought he could get away with it? The evidence is that he has (disenfranchising black voters in Florida in 2000) and wants to again (attempting the same trick already this year). That such a man, an amoral prevaricator and ruthless opportunist, actually has supporters in his bid to wreck American democracy appalls me. I think that the coming election will result in a constitutional crisis of unprecedented danger. I consider a vote for Bush a vote for tyranny.

Professor Frouney turned from the blackboard and pushed her glasses back up onto the bridge of her nose. "And so the conspiracy between President Evil, the Ku Klux Klan, and Crispy Cream is laid bare. Crispy Cream will offer free donuts in areas with large black populations, thereby drawing blacks from the voting booths. While they're enjoying their 'free' donuts, Klansmen disguised as Crispy Cream staff will steal their voter registration cards, and President Evil's victory will be assured. You have a question?"

"What does this have to do with creative writing, ma'am?"

Professor Frouney stared. "Why, nothing. Nothing at all. Yes, Ms. Schultz?"

"Your theory is very...interesting. Will you be writing a political satire?"

No, because I don't know anything.

"Then why the hell are you spouting off in Slate?"

"I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean."

"Look up at the top of the page, dumbass. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go get a drop slip."

Jennifer Egan: I'm voting for John Kerry. Not just because the Bush administration has plunged us into an opportunistic war that has needlessly killed thousands, wrecked the economy, widened the chasm between rich and poor, savaged the environment, tried to mess with our Constitution, swatted away the international community, and caused me to wonder whether I really am an American, if being American means having to embrace a man like George W. Bush as my proxy, the avatar of my wishes and beliefs in the wider world--not, finally, for any of those reasons, but because I believe that John Kerry might be a great president. I hope to God he wins.

"Thank you, thank you, and welcome to the annual meeting of the Overwrought Novelists Society. Our speaker tonight -- as I'm sure you're all aware! -- is Senator Pupidog, who is Senator Pure's running mate. I'm just so excited to be introducing one of the men who will be the avatars of our wishes and beliefs, the receptacles for our hopes, dreams, and aspirations, the masters of our fates and the captains of our souls, the very incarnations of our national being! And, God willing, they will save us from President Evil and his brainwashed followers."

Russell Banks: I'll vote for John Kerry. His election won't reverse our nation's rush to establish a fascist plutocracy, it's too late for that.

"We're back with Punch, Counterpunch. Rusty Essenell is also pessimistic about the nation's future. Tell us about that, Rusty."

"Rick's comet is too good for us."

Daniel Handler: Anyone who reads my work knows that I favor de-escalation rather than inflammation of violence, the discouragement rather than the display of avarice and careful contemplation over rash action. For these reasons and more I am voting for Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards.

"Hello once again, children! Uncle Ham Dandler welcomes you back to the Fluffy Bunny Rainbow Hour. We're going to talk about violence today. Do you know what violence is? It's when you hurt someone. You know that's very bad. Children should never hurt anyone, for any reason. Neither should anyone else. It's bad for you to hit someone, and it's just as bad for your parents to spank you. So if they do, be sure and call 911 and tell them your parents are hurting you. And when the police officer shows up, ask him why he has that gun."

Roger L. Simon: I am a registered Democrat. I disagree with George W. Bush on gay marriage, stem-cell research, a woman's right to choose, and, to a lesser extent, a host of other issues, but I am supporting him unreservedly for president. We are in a protracted war with Islamofascism and I do not trust John Kerry to lead us in that war for one minute. Also, I think my party has been hijacked by a cult of know-nothing isolationism out of the 1930s. But if they win, I hope the hell I'm wrong.

"And that, Caesar, is why I'm voting for Evil."

"Er, well, thanks Roger, for that, uh, dissenting view."

"Pig."

"Racist."

"Nazi."

In the boardroom of the most secret, most powerful agency in America, Joey Katzenjammer turned to his fellows. "Ghastly. Horrible," he said. "And that fellow's a novelist?"

"Not only that, but he's one of ours," replied Mitch Nosener.

"What do you mean, 'one of ours'?"

"He's a screenwriter, too."

"Oh my God!" shrieked Harvey Einstein. "A screenwriter voting for Evil?"

"This is terrible," said Fred Flipper. "We can't have our people stumping for Evil. Why, this would take us back to the darkest days of the blacklist. We have to nip this garbage in the bud. I sure as hell won't be buying any of his scripts. What do you all say?"

"Agreed." "Yes." "Right."

George Saunders: I am going to vote for John Kerry because...Tom Sawyer...is obsessed with a highly conceptualized view of the world...

"Let's think of this in terms of Huck Finn," Professor Maunders wrote in his article in the Custodian. "Huck is generous, concerned about the suffering of others, generally pleased with life, and interested in it. Tom Sawyer, on the other hand, is obsessed with a highly conceptualized view of the world, and imposing this view on others (the Sunday school picnic, Huck, Jim)... Huck is bold, curious, flexible. Tom is, at heart, afraid of the world, suspicious, ego-driven, incurious, and rigid. Our nation is engaged in a struggle to decide if it is going to be the United States of Tom or the United States of Huck. Is Sen. Pure, then, Huck? No, but he is more Huck-like than our current president, who, in an attempt to answer a complicated question ("What to do about terrorism?") with a simple answer ("Exterminate the brutes...") has led us into one of the bigger and more tragic Sunday school picnics in recent memory."[*]

David Amsden: I'm voting for John Kerry. This will be my first foray into the voting booth, actually--for the most part I find politics alienating, difficult to process.

...Really, though, the clincher came when I stumbled across some excerpts of Kerry's Vietnam journals. I couldn't help but think: the writing, the writing, the writing. It was hard and real and surprisingly beautiful, which, for me, was something I could believe in.

"Why, David! What a nice surprise! I didn't expect to see you here!"

Novelist David Lionsden looked around in confusion for the source of the voice. "Uh, er, OK. Do I know you?"

The owner of the kind voice turned him around to face her. "Yes, dear. I'm your mother. Oh, David! How long have you had this shirt on?"

"Oh, Mom! I--I didn't recognize you."

"That's because you have your glasses on top of your head again, dear. There, now can you see?"

"Oh, yes, thanks, that's much---oh wow! Where am I? What are all these people doing here? I thought this was the men's room."

"No, dear, this is a polling place."

"Oh, is that what it looks like? This place has terrible feng shui, did you know that? But I'm glad to know it's a voting place. I didn't know what you'd be doing in the men's room. I thought I was having another one of those dreams, you know? But I was awake. That's what I couldn't understand. What if I'd gone into one of these little stalls! But what are you doing here?"

"I'm an election official, dear. Would you like to vote while you're here? Are you registered?"

"Uhhh, I don't -- oh, yeah! Yes I am! A nice girl at my publisher's helped me. But I don't know how to vote. I've never done it. Too alienating, you know? Is it hard?"

"Not at all. These 'little stalls' are the voting booths, and here's the---"

"Oh my God? What's this? Machinery??? I can't cope with machinery!"

"There, there...it's really very easy."

"Oh, good. But, but what's this? This -- this -- writing! It's so ugly, so alienating! I can't believe in that!"

"Sweetie, those are just the voting instructions."

Nicole Krauss: I'm voting for Kerry. I've just discovered that, through some unsurprising accident of the Board of Elections, I'm actually registered to vote in two different counties. So I'm considering voting for him twice. I really think it's not alarmist to say that if Bush is reelected to another four years, it may be the end of life as we know it.

Cissy Ingenue emitted another sigh, and checked her watch. The voting lines were so long! If it had been anything else, she would have just bailed. But this was her first time voting, and she was proud to be taking up her role as a citizen. "Wow, these lines are really long," she said to no one in particular.

"Tell me about it," said the woman ahead of her. "I've been standing in lines all day."

"All day!" Cissy wailed. "In this line?"

"Oh, no," the woman replied. "In other voting lines around town. This is my twentieth vote today."

"I see." Cissy hesitated. "But isn't that...illegal?"

"Oh, sure," the woman shrugged. "But I'd rather break a few stupid voting laws than see President Evil re-elected. It's not alarmist to say that if he's re-elected, it's the end of life as we know it. The seas will boil and the mountains crumble, and that's a fact. It's no exaggeration to say that boils and running sores will break out on the bodies of every American, and all the first born will be stricken blind. It's not a bit of hyperbole that the sky will turn as black as pitch and the sun will become as blood. Giant winged aardvarks will carry off the inhabitants, and the earth will crack and gorge forth armies of insurance salesmen and tax accountants. It's been scientifically proven that the fabric of space-time will implode and whole universe will be destroyed! So, who are you voting for?"

"Uh, well, I -- gosh! Is that the time? Gotta run."

Thomas Beller: I'm voting for Kerry. He isn't afraid of America. He understands that you can love your country and criticize it, too.

I saw the face of the Republican Party the other day at the Saratoga racetrack. It was the last day of the races, and a small woman with a big hat walked through the crowd carrying a handmade sign, written in script: "Little Old Ladies in White Tennis Shoes For Kerry"...I watched as she passed an old-young guy, mid-30s, already well-paunched, gold watch, smoking a cigar. He looked at her, at the sign, and then bent forward and spat out a nasty remark in her ear. I was too far away to hear it. But the way he shook his head after he passed her, his body language, maybe just the watch, I was sure it was nasty.

"Our last guest is Thomas Ringer. You share Candy Cornes's concerns about the violent tendencies of the Repugnican Party, don't you?"

"I sure do, Caesar. I saw the face of the Repugnican Party the other day at the zoo. We were in the monkey house, and a guy in the crowd was wearing a Pure button. And one of the chimpanzees started flinging its doody at him! Because he was for Pure! Well, I knew that day that I couldn't vote for Evil, because he looks just like a chimp, and if a chimp would do that, so would Evil. I mean, it's totally logical."
==============================================================
[*]Almost verbatim from his actual answer. A good satirist knows when to get the hell out of the way. And so, sometimes, does a bad one.

The writers' quotes were edited to cut to the chase, but most of them have veins of rich, stupidy goodness I didn't have time to tap. One quote was unashamedly edited to bring its stupidity into sharp relief.

There were a couple of surprises. I disagree with John Updike's conclusions, but he was at least a grown-up, which most of the others didn't seem to be. There were a few besides Roger Simon voting for Bush, and a couple who said they didn't know anyone should be particularly interested in a novelist's opinion.

Roger's use of "Islamofascism" must have caused some heart palpitations among the others.

I was sure I'd seen this over at Roger's, but now I can't find it. Did he get cold feet in the end, and remove it? Stand firm, Roger! Remember the word of Gunga Dan: Courage!

Posted 3:54 PM by Angie Schultz

InstaFactChecking

Just saw Instantman on MSNBC's Countdown. I was lucky to catch it, since I only read Glenn's post about five minutes before he was on. That twerp from Daily Kos was also on, looking just terrible. Does he look like that always? Really, is he sick? Maybe it was just the lighting. Scott Johnson from Powerline rounded out the cast.

But I don't have anything to say about their performances. It was Keith Olbermann who needs his posterior checked. When introducing the new JibJab cartoon, "Good to Be in DC" (sung to the tune of "Dixie"), he said something like, "This time it's not based on Woody Guthrie, but on Stephen Foster." But Foster did not write "Dixie", Daniel Decatur Emmett did! Take that, lumbering Old Media dinosaur!

(As for the cartoon: it was funny, but I'd hoped to get through the campaign without seeing John Edwards's animated butt cheeks.)

Posted 8:45 AM by Angie Schultz

The Cuddly Killer

Lileks remarks on a Che Guevara doll he found in a card store. It's not like Lileks to miss a trick in googling a link, but he does. So I did it for him.

Here's a site where you can buy the Che doll:

Che Guevara Doll will please the most ardent revolutionary. Che Guevara stands about 15" tall but he still towers above much larger dolls.

Ah, post-modern ironic attitude. Har!

Che's part of the Little Stink -- oh, I mean -- Little Thinkers series of dolls, which includes Einstein, Freud, and artists like Monet, Kahlo, and Van Gogh, who I did not realize classed as "thinkers". ("Little Thinkers" might refer to the people who buy them in the belief that they're intellectuals, I suppose.)

The Einstein doll is cute:

Albert Einstein Doll is one gift you don't have to be an Einstein to appreciate! Our Einstein doll stands about 15" tall. Toss him around faster than the speed of light and he"ll land before you thow him!

He looks extremely irritated at the prospect.

I want a Nietzsche doll. Nietzsche -- or Stalin, take your pick. Could also be Hitler if you squint. There's also a Karl Marx.

The Freud doll plays music, just in case he wasn't creepy enough.

Hey, everybody, meet WEB Dubois, guest-starring on South Park!

Posted 8:36 PM by Angie Schultz

CBS: Reality Is Beside the Point

Macho stud hombre blogger Bill at INDC Journal has exclusive interviews with three people from CBS regarding their story on restarting the draft. First, the story's reporter, Richard Schlesinger:

INDC: "Probably the main concern with the story is that the e-mails that are shown in the piece are false; they've been debunked on various internet sites long ago ..."

Schlesinger: "The fact is, they were going around. I know several people that got them, and it's gotten people all riled up. Whether or not there's any reality to there being a draft, is almost besides the point. Do I think there's going to be a draft? No. But it's an issue that people are talking about."

Emphasis mine.
And next, the overseeing producer, Linda Karas:

INDC: "Ok, the e-mails in the story have been criticized because they've been debunked online for some time, why did you use them?"

Karas: "The truth of the e-mails were absolutely irrelevant to the piece, because all the story said was that people were worried. It's a story about human beings that are afraid of the draft. We did not say that this (e-mail) was true, it's just circulating. We are not verifying the e-mail."

Again, emphasis mine.

You got that? Even if your primary source is known to be false, it's still worth covering if there's a controversy. Well, I hope we'll soon see CBS covering some much more important stories, such as the fact that markings on the backs of highway signs (do a search on Serge Monast) are actually directions to UN Chinese troops (Google cache) in their black helicopters which will round us up and load us into white boxcars for transportation to concentration camps (handy state-by-state list).

NOTE: Not responsible for any computer or brain damage resulting from following any of those links.

If not, perhaps CBS will address the allegations made on some websites[*] that their senior staff, at least, are all Cthulhu worshippers, and in fact that CBS stands for Cthulhu Broadcasting System. There are also rumors circling[**] that CBS is a hotbed of autocoprophagia. The veracity of these allegations[+] will surely be considered irrelevant. The only criterion is whether they get people stirred up[++].

[*] This one.
[**] With any luck.
[+] I made 'em up, right here.
[++] Are you stirred yet?

Posted 9:09 PM by Angie Schultz

Pssst! CBS! Need some news tips?

Well, it looks as if CBS is still in the market for some hot Hot HOT story tips. Well, I got 'em right here -- absolutely genuine (in that I, personally, did not make them up).

FBI scanning random computers for illegal downloads!

Bush refused to sell his house to blacks!

AND the voting rights of blacks will terminate in 2007! It's all Bush's fault!

You could have your FDIC insurance denied if you violate the Patriot Act!

The Post Office is going to tax email! (I have the actual documents for this one. And don't you worry none, CBS; you won't get fooled again! These were typed on a genuine Smith-Corona typewriter in pica. In 1963. Or at least, they look like they were.)

Oh, hey, here's a great one:

Bill Clinton got special treatment to avoid the draft! And he did not fulfill the requirements he had agreed to in order to do so!

What do you mean, you're not interested in that one?

Posted 8:12 PM by Angie Schultz

Floridation and Carter's Truth Decay

Jimmy Carter whacks vigorously away at my last remaining respect for him with this column in yesterday's WaPo. Let's begin:

After the debacle in Florida four years ago...

Whoops, hate to stop in the middle of the first sentence, but this would be a good time to remind everyone that there are two issues here:

1) There were accusations of voting irregularities in Florida, and

2) The vote in Florida was really, really close.

These two are not related, and Carter seems determined to obscure that fact.

Since I'm sitting here in my pajamas, I don't have to go looking for any facts or anything, so I'll just assert without proof that, in every state, in every election, there are always voting irregularities and complaints of vote tampering. Some of them may be actual tampering; some are just due to poor organization.

But in Florida these (alleged) irregularities were magnified by the close election there. The vote in Florida could have been absolutely positively 100% fair and aboveboard, and there still would have been a "debacle", because of the closeness of the vote. There still would have had to have been a recount, and statistically speaking, there still would've been errors.

To continue with Jimmy:

The Carter Center has monitored more than 50 elections, all of them held under contentious, troubled or dangerous conditions. When I describe these activities...the almost inevitable questions are: "Why don't you observe the election in Florida?" and "How do you explain the serious problems with elections there?"

A good answer to this question would be: "Because Florida is not new to democracy. Because "disenfranchisement" in Florida means someone was told that the lines were too long, so he should come back later -- but, like, that was too much trouble. It does not mean your ballot says, 'Should George Bush be President? Choose one: __Yes __Kill Me Now'" But Carter seems determined to obscure that fact, too.

(Oh, and I wouldn't brag too much about your oversight of the Venezuelan elections if I were you, Jimmy.)

Carter says that Florida is missing some "basic international requirements" for a fair election, among which is:

Uniformity in voting procedures, so that all citizens, regardless of their social or financial status, have equal assurance that their votes are cast in the same way and will be tabulated with equal accuracy. Modern technology is already in use that makes electronic voting possible, with accurate and almost immediate tabulation and with paper ballot printouts so all voters can have confidence in the integrity of the process.

During the 2000 election, I was living in Australia, and the media there were full of wonder that we were using that antiquated Hollerith card technology. Not only that, but some more privileged areas got to use modern, efficient touch-screen voting machines, while the poor and downtrodden had to make do with these ancient punchcard devices.

During the 1998 election, I was living in among the technological have-nots and economic hopelessness in poverty-stricken Silicon Valley. We used punchards. We used them, I figured, because the voting stalls were easy to move. Most of my five years there, voting was done in the hall of a church about a block from my apartment (if I'd had a blog then, I could've thrown something on over my pajamas and toddled on over to vote). The last election I was there, though, the polling place had been moved to someone's garage a couple blocks away. If we'd had big, bulky voting machines, we might have had to have permanent polling places, which would have meant fewer polling places, and therefore voting would've been less convenient.

(Oh, yeah, I meant to say, impoverished, technologically deprived, and heavily Republican Silicon Valley.)

(And we had butterfly ballots, too, though in those halcyon days we didn't know they had special names, or that we were supposed to whine when we were too stupid to figure them out. Ah, things were simpler then.)

You see, that's the sort of thing that happens when you have small government entities and let them decide voting procedures for themselves: different areas make different choices. The Australians never could understand that. They are much less federal than we are.

Carter tells us about the horrible civil rights violations in Florida:

Several thousand ballots of African Americans were thrown out on technicalities in 2000, and a fumbling attempt has been made recently to disqualify 22,000 African Americans (likely Democrats), but only 61 Hispanics (likely Republicans), as alleged felons.

That is an odd discrepancy in numbers, but I'm sure the Republicans will be surprised to find that Hispanics are their voting bloc. (Yeah, yeah, I know about the Cubans; but not every Hispanic is Cuban, not even in Florida.)

I think this is my favorite part:

The top election official [outed in the previous (elided) paragraph as a "highly partisan" elector for Bush -- A.S.] has also played a leading role in qualifying Ralph Nader as a candidate, knowing that two-thirds of his votes in the previous election came at the expense of Al Gore. She ordered Nader's name be included on absentee ballots even before the state Supreme Court ruled on the controversial issue.

Oh my God! You mean she let Nader on the ballot, knowing that he would take votes away from Democrats? Everyone knows you're only supposed to take votes away from Republicans! (Really, Jimmy, even if you had a point there, you might've expressed in such a way that didn't suggest you were more horrified that Bush might win than that the rules were broken. You know, just for the sake of appearances.)

You know what this is about. In 1980 I had a choice of voting for warmongering right-wing lunatic Ronald Reagan, or craven wimpy peacenik Jimmy Carter. So I voted for John Anderson, a third party candidate whose chief virtue was that he was not Reagan or Carter. Had there been no Anderson, I probably would've held my nose and voted for Carter. Betcha he's still smarting over that.

Meanwhile, in other states, Democrats have been trying to keep Nader off the ballot for that reason.

It is unconscionable to perpetuate fraudulent or biased electoral practices in any nation. It is especially objectionable among us Americans, who have prided ourselves on setting a global example for pure democracy. With reforms unlikely at this late stage of the election, perhaps the only recourse will be to focus maximum public scrutiny on the suspicious process in Florida.

Let's say it again: every state in the Union, in every election, has some voting "irregularity" (scare quotes meaning it's not necessarily an illegality) which has someone screaming bloody murder, justly or not.

The mess that was the 2000 election did not come about because of voting irregularities in Florida. The close election only threw those particular irregularities into sharp relief. If God himself had been in charge of voting in Florida, it still would've been a nailbiter.

And Jimmy "Dances with Dictators" Carter would still be hinting that the Devil was behind it.

UPDATE: Jane Galt suggests that Carter is only accidentally looking like a complete partisan hack. Oh, well, then.

Posted 8:26 AM by Angie Schultz

What's Your Mama's Name, Child?

[The story you are about to read is true. The names have been changed to protect the innocent.]

My mama, for the sixty some-odd years of her life, has been named Mary Jane Diana. This was a source of wonder to us when we were children, since having two middle names was unheard of. It simply wasn't done. Why, lots of people didn't even have one! Apparently, Grandma and Grandpa couldn't decide whether Jane or Diana should be her middle name, so they compromised and used both. This is also a source of wonderment, since that sort of stubbornness usually stems from wanting to name a child after a relative, and to my knowledge we have no other Janes or Dianas in the family.

Well, two middle names being impossible, the "Diana" became silent on official documents. Mom's checks and other papers were usually in the name Mary J., with occasionally some illiterate organization dubbing her Maryjane.

Well, last year Mom and Dad went on a Caribbean cruise, which was a real thrill for them. Since they actually left the country!, they needed some sort of proof of nationality. Mom's previous forays into a foreign land (Canada) needed no such thing, so she figured she'd be OK with her "birth certificate".

But it turns out that the "birth certificate" is really no such thing. Not having seen it, I don't know what it is, but it was deemed inadequate. There they were, about to leave on this trip of a lifetime, and Mom's primary form of birth ID was no good.

The cruise line (or customs, or whatever) finally relented, but I guess my parents figured they needed real ID. So recently they applied for official birth certificates from the county (or possibly the state), and Mom finally learned her True Name: Maryjane Piana.

Piana? Yes, somebody wrote "Diana" with a little too much vertical, and some idiot transcribed it as "Piana". ("Why, shore we named her Piana, after that music box they got down to the church. We thought it was an awful purty name.")

Now she's Maryjane Piana, and she thinks changing it would take a lawyer and hundreds of dollars. (That might not be true. I tried looking on the web, but the state where she was born doesn't seem to have any instructions for correcting a birth certificate.)

Now, this has not come up before because Mom has not held a steady job since something like 1963. That used to be common for women. It was also common for people not to need a jillion pieces of paper to get a job or a bank account. That's before the IRS took an interest in your every crook and nanny. Those inclined to wail, fume, rage, or declaim against the creeping power of the government, feel free to go ahead without me. I'm just going to giggle that my mother's legal name is "Maryjane Piana".

Two things come to mind:

1) Was she ever legally married?

2) She's lucky her parents didn't name her Denise.

In other name follies, my stepdad had an aunt whose mother named her Ruby Crystal, but the doctor who delivered her didn't think this was a good enough name, so he wrote "Mary Catherine" on the birth certificate. (Perhaps the doctor, ahead of his time, feared she might lase at some point.) She worked at a hospital, and I was surprised, visiting her once, to hear someone call her "Mary". That's how I found out about the name change. Ruby had a sister named Opal. Wonder what was on her birth certificate.

Posted 9:46 PM by Angie Schultz

Avast Ye Lubbers, and Prepare to Be Bored!

Arr, maties. And once again it be the 19th of September: Talk Like a Pirate Day. I was thinking that all me bloggy maties had forgotten it, but I see that Long Island lubber Michele has posted about the pirate Dan Rather. ("S. S. Memo" har har har, that'd be a good 'un.)

Arr, now there's a poor excuse for a pirate, lorlumme. Forgery is a chancy game, and it don't pay beans. Stick to plunder and kidnap fer ransom, ye great walrus. That's where the loot be.

Ye might have got to wonderin' where it was I was keepin' meself. Well, I wasn't. Some others were keepin' me. I was bein' held captive by some scurvy dogs somewhere near the Great Orion Nebula. Nice scenic spot it is, but the radiation is a might thick.

Arr, what's that ye say? Well these be space pirates, o'course. Be ye dense? I sent up a distress signal, but it'll take about 1500 years for it to get back here, as I shoulda recalled. Arrr, bloody light.

Anyways, what with takin' my revenge and gettin' caught up on the backlog o' floggins, I might not be postin' reg'lar. I'll give it the ol' pillage try, though.

Arr.

Posted 12:33 PM by Angie Schultz

Trial in a Lower Court

Lynne Stewart, who is/was the lawyer for Omar Abdel-Rahman (now doing life in the slammer for his part in the 1993 WTC bombing), has been accused by the government of using her attorney privilege to carry messages which allow Abdel-Rahman to "inspire acts of terrorism" around the world.

She, naturally, says that she's innocent and what's really on trial is the U.S. system of justice. Of course. Well, now she's "decided to take her case to the court of public opinion."

Oyez Oyez. The Court of Public Opinion is now in session, the Hon. John Q. Public presiding. Approach and be heard. But be aware that this court does not abide by the rules of a court of law. Facts are not weighted as highly as perceptions. Unchecked emotionalism is allowed, even encouraged. Prior bad acts will be tracked down and used in evidence against you. Hearsay and innuendo are permissable. Your private life, political opinions, and fashion sense will all be scrutinized and criticized. If any justice is done, it will be by merest chance.

Exhibit A will be a section of this interview of Stewart by Susie Day of the Lefty Monthly Review:

Day: Let's say you were part of a government that you actually trusted and supported, and your country held political prisoners. At what point would you think monitoring and controlling these people was acceptable?

Stewart: I'm such a strange amalgam of old-line things and new-line things. I don't have any problem with Mao or Stalin or the Vietnamese leaders or certainly Fidel locking up people they see as dangerous. Because so often, dissidence has been used by the greater powers to undermine a people's revolution. The CIA pays a thousand people and cuts them loose, and they will undermine any revolution in the name of freedom of speech.

(The Court thanks Eugene Volokh for this evidence.)

Annoying Reporter: What will the verdict be? Judge J.Q. Public is kind of schizophrenic fellow (he is large and contains multitudes). Obviously Stewart thought the crowd at White Plains YWCA would be sympathetic to her claims of persecution, but it probably didn't know about this interview. But Public also contains multitudes living in flyover country, who are less concerned with the legal niceties when the case assisting terrorists. And they don't like Commie-lovin' lawyers at all. Ah, the judge is back! Let's listen:

Judge J.Q. Public: Lynne Stewart, this Court finds you guilty of being an anti-American scumbag. This is not a crime under the law, but in the Court of Public Opinion, it's a flogging offense. Furthermore, the fact that you are an anti-American scumbag counts heavily against you in the actual case at hand. Therefore, this Court additionally finds you guilty of being a slime-covered, Commie-loving, Islamomob lawyer. You are guilty, bitch! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Bailiff, have the defendant fed to wolves.

Shoulda stuck with the law courts, babe.

SLAM! Next case!

In truth, I sure as hell hope the authorities have their legal ducks arranged, because they apparently did record her conversations with her client. This would be a definite no-no, unless they had some cause to suspect her beforehand. She's still a Commie-loving slime, though.

Posted 12:27 PM by Angie Schultz

Blog N Troll High School

Der Commissar has unearthed the 1965 Blogville High School Yearbook, and whaddaya know, you're all in it. Not me. You. Not that I'm bitter. Oh, wait, I am.

Not that I need any stupidy stinky pseudo-Soviet bloggers. I can post my own yearbook entry:

Angie Schultz [not pictured; you'll thank us]

Future Procrastinators of America, 4; Misanthropes' Friendship Society, 3,4; Embittered Loners' Social Club, 3,4; Writers' Bloc, 1,2,3,4; Pres., V.P., Sec., Treas. of Science Club Nobody Else Wanted to Join, 1,2,3,4; Association of Students Who Thought Honor Society Was Lame But Joined It Anyway Just to Wear the Gold Tassel at Graduation, 4; "Miss Information", 4

(You know, I bet if I'd put that entry down on my application to Harvard, they would've let me in, on chutzpah alone. Ah, hindsight...)

Posted 5:47 PM by Angie Schultz

Jimmy Carter: The Director's Cut

CNN has a transcript of Jimmy Carter's speech to the Democratic National Convention. I think there were a few lines left out, so I've put them back in. Think of it as closed captioning, or subtitles.

-----------------------------------------------------
My name is Jimmy Carter, and I'm not running for president.
It didn't go so well the last time.

...

Twenty-eight years ago, I was running for president. And I said then, "I want a government as good and as honest and as decent and as competent and as compassionate as are the American people."
I said that twenty-four years ago, too, and Ronald Reagan was elected.

...

As many of you may know, my first chosen career was in the United States Navy, where I served as a submarine officer.
I was on a nucular sub.

At that time, my shipmates and I were ready for combat and prepared to give our lives to defend our nation and its principles. At the same time, we always prayed that our readiness would preserve the peace.
It was the praying that did it, not the guns and stuff.

I served under two presidents, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower, men who represented different political parties, both of whom had faced their active military responsibilities with honor.

They knew the horrors of war. And later as commanders in chief, they exercised restraint and judgment, and they had a clear sense of mission.

We had a confidence that our leaders, both military and civilian, would not put our soldiers and sailors in harm's way by initiating wars of choice unless America's vital interests were in danger.
Nobody ever had any doubts about Korea, or the Cold War, ever. Nobody's tried to second-guess the A-bomb drop, either.

...

Today, our Democratic Party is led by another former naval officer, one who volunteered for military service. He showed up when assigned to duty, and he served with honor and distinction.

He also knows the horrors of war and the responsibilities of leadership.
In particular, his leadership is responsible for some of those horrors of war. Or so he's said.


...

As you all know, our country faces many challenges at home involving energy, taxation, the environment, education and health. To meet these challenges, we need new leaders in Washington whose policies are shaped by working American families instead of the super-rich...
Like John Kerry...oops!

Today, our dominant international challenge is to restore the greatness of America...
(Our European friends can just forget I said that; I know it scares them.)

...based on telling the truth, a commitment to peace, and respect for civil liberties at home and basic human rights around the world.
As long as it doesn't involve fighting.

...

After 9/11, America stood proud -- wounded, but determined and united. A cowardly attack on innocent civilians brought us an unprecedented level of cooperation and understanding around the world. But in just 34 months, we have watched with deep concern as all this good will has been squandered by a virtually unbroken series of mistakes and miscalculations.
Made by the French, the Germans, the Russians, the UN, and Saddam Hussein.

Unilateral acts and demands have isolated the United States from the very nations we need to join us in combating terrorism.
Such as the British, the Australians, the Italians, the...

Let us not forget that the Soviets lost the Cold War because the American people combined the exercise of power with adherence to basic principles, based on sustained bipartisan support.
The Democrats backed the Cold War 100%!

We understood the positive link between the defense of our own freedom and the promotion of human rights.
Unlike, say, George Bush.

But recent policies have cost our nation its reputation as the world's most admired champion of freedom and justice.
Taking out Saddam was a blow against freedom and justice everywhere!

What a difference these few months of extremism have made.
I'm talking about Bush here. Bin Laden? Who's that?

...

With our allies disunited, the world resenting us, and the Middle East ablaze...
Just like it was twenty-four years ago, when I left office...

...

In the meantime, the Middle East peace process has come to a screeching halt.
And yet, paradoxically, Israel has been more peaceful since then. Pay that no mind.

...

The achievements of Camp David a quarter century ago and the more recent progress made by President Bill Clinton are now in peril.
I brokered a great peace deal a quarter century ago. Have you heard? It's in all the history books. Of course, there's been no peace since then...

...

Elsewhere, North Korea's nuclear menace, a threat far more real and immediate than any posed by Saddam Hussein, has been allowed to advance unheeded, with potentially ominous consequences for peace and stability in Northeast Asia.
Not that we should confront North Korea!

These are some of the prices of our government has paid for this radical departure from the basic American principles and values that are espoused by John Kerry.
Er, a list of those values and principles was supposed to go here, but he never got back to me on that. Just use your imaginations.

In repudiating extremism, we need to recommit ourselves to a few common-sense principles that should transcend partisan differences.
NOTE: "extremism" = "Bush". Not Islamism. Islam is a religion of peace. Bush is the extremist.

First, we cannot enhance our own security if we place in jeopardy what is most precious to us, namely the centrality of human rights in our daily lives and in global affairs.
And that means leaving dictators alone!

Second, we cannot maintain our historic self-confidence as a people if we generate public panic.
Or if we want to keep the French happy.

Third, we cannot do our duty as citizens and patriots if we pursue an agenda that polarizes and divides our country.
So I'm going to have Michael Moore taken out and shot. Ha ha! Just kidding.

...

You can't be a war president one day and claim to be a peace president the
next, depending on the latest political polls.
Oops! John, that was going to be a private remark to you. Don't know how it got in the speech.

When our national security requires military action, John Kerry has already proven in Vietnam that he will not hesitate to act.
He will not hesitate to act in a flashy yet ultimately pointless manner, claim glory, then engage in shallow public breast beating when polls so decree.

And as a proven defender of our national security, John Kerry will strengthen the global alliance against terrorism while avoiding unnecessary wars.
He chides! He bribes! He makes kissy face with Chirac while being stabbed in the back!

Ultimately, the basic issue is whether America will provide global leadership that springs from the unity and the integrity of the American people...
We'll be all unified and integral and stuff, and they'll have to follow us! We won't have to do a thing!

...or whether extremist doctrines, the manipulation of the truth, will define America's role in the world.
Remember: Bush is the extremist truth manipulator here. There are no other threats.

At stake is nothing less than our nation's soul.

In a few months, I will, God willing, enter my 81st year of my life.

...

Thank you, and God bless America.
Remember, Europeans: my invocations of God are harmless; Bush's invocations of God show a man in the grip of a terrifying religious fervor.

-----------------------------------------------------

Well, that's all in good clean fun. I am sorry, but not surprised, to hear Carter talk like this. He thinks that "leadership" is being wise and strong and sitting here on our unity and integrity, and yet not doing a single blessed thing. In case he's forgotten, this is pretty much what did his presidency in, the touching yet naive belief that good intentions alone would earn the respect of the world. News flash: People without good intentions don't respect them. And even some with good intentions think that "leadership" (whatever that may mean at a given moment) requires that we do something more than sit quietly with our self-placed halos shining smugly around us. We have the UN for that.

Many bloggers have said that they don't believe a Kerry administration will do anything much different than Bush has done. I don't know what to think, really. This David Brooks column pretty much sums it up for me:

Kerry has been talking for years, and yet such is the thicket of his verbiage that he has achieved almost complete strategic ambiguity.

... Is Kerry a little dull because he is steady and sensible, or is he just incapable of making up his mind? Is he prudential because in times of crisis the nation needs a steady hand, or is he cautious because he simply doesn't grasp that we're in a new world, confronted by a rabid ideological foe?

Good questions. I don't know the answer.

But I'm pretty sure I know what our poor abandoned "traditional allies" will do if Kerry is elected. Where Bush got a cold shoulder and a curt brush-off, Kerry will get a warm embrace and a polite brush-off. Kerry and the Europeans will have wonderful dinners where the champagne freely flows, and they will speak in beautiful French, and get along so amiably.

And Kerry will be able to get our European friends to come to certain agreements with us, unlike that vulgar cowboy Bush. But there will be qualifications, you understand. Exceptions. Nuance. And we all (especially Kerry) will walk away quite satisfied, despite the fact that the agreements have been qualified and nuanced into futility. It isn't that the Europeans will have put one over on Kerry, but more the fact that he understands all this subtlety and sophistication. He understands the importance of coming to meaningless agreements. After all, we have agreed! We have consulted our allies! And isn't that what's really important? Actually getting things done comes a distant second.