It took me about 45 seconds to vote. Good thing everybody freaked out and waited in line for 3 hours to vote early. Really cleared things out for me.
I am going to post an election chat-style thread. Too lazy to set it up as an actual chat, but if anyone wants to make this your election night HQ I'll be thrilled to use the thread comments as a faux-chat.
And the conservative firing squad shoulders its rifles and prepares to fire.
Former White House aid Peter Wehner insists that the ideology never fails but is often failed. "The GOP is in bad shape. Conservatism is not."
Kathryn Jean Lopez at NRO dares us to "Blame Palin at (our) Own Risk." She somewhat delusionally notes that "without her, all may have been lost for the Republicans weeks ago" in bold defiance of reality. Perhaps she missed the part where McCain threatened to inch ahead of Obama after the convention, and then Palin opened her mouth and turned the ticket into a joke.
Who would have thought that Victoria Jackson is mentally retarded.
A Canadian comedy duo crank called Sarah Palin and managed to convince her that she was speaking to Nicolas Sarkozy. Recording to be released immediately before the election for maximum damage, I'm sure.
John Ridley makes an excellent argument about how Palin could have been the GOP's Obama if, like the Democrat, she had been slowly introduced to the public over a four-year period rather than being taken from the shithouse to the penthouse in 12 hours.
Well, goodbye to the twenties. I feel about having lived for 30 years the way Mark Twain described a trip to the falls in "Niagara":
You can descend a staircase here a hundred and fifty feet down, and stand at the edge of the water. After you have done it, you will wonder why you did it; but you will then be too late.
Given my epic fail on the academic job market I am starting to wonder what, exactly, I have to show for the twenties. I mean, other than a profane blog.
Hero did not make it. While she showed plenty of will to survive her stroke – moving about the cage to feed herself and interact even though it was clearly difficult – she had a second and, finally, a third on Friday. She lost the ability to move her limbs or chew food around 5 PM, at which point we quit trying to sustain her. We petted her, thanked her for being a part of our lives, and tried to make her comfortable. At 11:00 I laid down, put her on my chest and petted her until she had one final stroke and stopped breathing. As far as ways to go, I think that is a pretty good one.
I don't understand death. No one does, which is why the great bulk of collective intellectual energy in human history has been devoted to constructing explanations for it. Yet that's all such "knowledge" is – an attempt to rationalize something we can't rationalize. Tell yourself whatever story you need to in order to accept life and death. Each is as good as any other. Resurrection, reincarnation, purgatory, eternal life in heaven, becoming part of the spirit world, haunting houses as a ghost, complete nothingness….it's all the same.
None of it, in my opinion, addresses the mystery of how putting food and water in something makes blood flow to organs which plug away and generate, after all that, what we call an individual. A person, or an animal, or whatever. The idea that I was holding Hero the Rat one minute – Hero, who loved dried lychee and tightrope-walking the top bar of her pen and running up my arm to spy the world from my shoulder – and then an empty, limp shell the next moment is something I can't understand. That biological processes cease and then consciousness, the greater-than-sum-of-parts end result of all that biology and chemistry, just disappears is justifiably described as a mystery.
I'm just glad we did not have to take her to the vet on Saturday to be euthanized. Nothing should have to die in a hospital.
RIP, Hero.
(Update: I feared the worst and the worst did not come. While Hero is not in great shape, rats are troopers and the veterinarian believes that she will recover. Huzzah.)
One of my rats, Hero, had a stroke. Pending the opinion of a veterinarian, I fear the worst. I'm surprising myself with how badly I feel and how attached I have become.
At the same time, the experience has made it obvious that I am a very lucky person. I'm nearly 30 and never had to experience death. Seriously. No one I had or have an emotional bond with has died. My grandmother (the sole grandparent I knew) died when I was in high school but, frankly, I don't remember her doing to much other than being cranky and yelling so I don't think it hit me overly hard. A friend of mine from high school football died in a car accident, and that was sad. But overall, I've never had to experience the kind of deep, personal loss that so many people feel.
A pet is different than a person, obviously, but a rat made me realize how thankful I am for the good health and company of everyone I love, two- or four-legged.
So of all the hypotheticals being thrown around during the General Election season, my favorite thus far was the friend who asked me "What happens if McCain dies before the election?" That's an obscure, interesting question to which I respond with another question – which election? The popular vote and the formal vote of the Electoral College are about six weeks apart, meaning that the correct response depends very much on when the nominee/candidate dies. And, believe it or not, there is precedent here. Seriously. I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.
If McCain/Obama died tomorrow, the candidates would be replaced according to the rules of their respective parties. For the Republicans, Rule #9 of the party bylaws states:
(The RNC) is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or…Vice President…as nominated by the national convention, or the Republican National Committee may reconvene the national convention for the purpose of filling any such vacancies.
Assuming that they would not go through the logistical nightmare of re-staging the national convention, the RNC leadership would hold a meeting (with one week of public notice required) and make the call. Shooting from the hip, I imagine that the committee would choose someone based on name recognition and ability to foster a sympathy vote. Given that Sarah Palin isn't even allowed to talk to reporters, I doubt they'd thrust her into the captain's chair. A recycled name (Giuliani, Thompson, etc) would likely get the call.
For the Democrats, their charter describes a similar process. The Chairperson (in this case, Howard Dean) has the sole power to convene the National Committee and fill a void on a "National ticket." An Obama death would almost certainly be followed with the nomination of Hill-dawg, retaining Biden for continuity.
This has never happened. A candidate has never responded to a nomination by dying before the general election. The same cannot be said of responses to the election itself.
1872 was not a good year for Democrats (more accurately, 1860 to 1932 were not good years for the Democrats). In that year the party was literally unable to scrape up a nominee to run against incumbent Republican and most-popular-man-in-America Ulysses S. Grant. For shits and giggles, newspaper magnate Horace Greeley ran on the entirely made-up "Liberal Republican" ticket. Content to allow some eccentric millionaire to waste his own money rather than the party coffers, the Democratic Party simply endorsed Greeley's kamikaze run.
Predictably, Grant trounced his token opponent, although under the circumstances Greeley's 43% of the popular vote wildly exceeded expectations. Then Horace decided to die on November 29, weeks after the election but before electors cast their votes in early December. The Democratic electors, unconstrained by rules, scattered their votes among Thomas Hendricks of Indiana (future VP under Grover Cleveland) , Greeley's running mate B.G. Brown, and Georgia Governor Charles Jenkins.
That the dead candidate lost the election took much of the pressure off of the process; it really didn't matter for whom the Democratic electors voted. What if the victorious candidate died? The default option for electors would be the Vice President-Elect, but note well that this is not required. Electors could pick anyone, and in fact that is exactly how the system was originally intended to operate. Some very, very strange things could happen, and Americans could end up with a President who wasn't even a candidate at any point in the election. Or someone who was a candidate but got tossed on the reject pile.
The example of 1872 reminds us that, unbeknownst to most Americans, nearly any electoral oddity we can imagine (and disregard as improbable) happened at some point in the 19th Century.
I wish the story was that exciting, but my webhost simply continued to prove that they don't understand the concept of automatically charging my credit card every month. Apparently the "shut down the site until Ed calls and says they can charge another $7 to his card" system is more efficient.
I hope you set aside your cynicism long enough to enjoy the Olympic opening ceremonies on Friday evening; it was an unprecedented visual spectacle. Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that the Chinese government has acted in typical authoritarian fashion, displacing 1,500,000 residents, censoring media access, and rounding up dissenters to create the image of perfect harmony that we see. Fully recognizing that, I cannot help but be impressed by the magnitude of the "show." They succeeded in making every previous Olympic ceremony look like a county fair and in terrifying London into wondering "How in the hell can we top that?" Every aspect of the coreographed performance was perfect, giving us the greatest hybrid of a circus, concert, and action movie ever made. Visually, they didn't miss a beat. Just look at the Beijing National Stadium and Swimming and Diving facilities. The Centennial Olympic Stadium from Atlanta 1996 looks like an Amish barn in comparison. Such is the advantage of a semi-authoritarian regime – they can command and direct the entirety of the nation's resources toward putting on a show.
One seemingly insignificant aspect of the ceremony really bothered me. Not because of what is says about China, but for what it says about us.
In the early portion of the ceremony, synchronized dancers formed the shape of a boat and oars to symbolize, Bob Costas pointed out, the ancient voyage of Zheng He. Without cheating, do you know who Zheng He is? I didn't. I had to look him up to discover that he was an explorer who sailed to a greater number of places than any famous European explorer – 100 years earlier – and is likely responsible for the spread of Islam in southeast Asia. Now, humility aside, I believe that I know a good deal more about world history than the "average" American, a simple function of the fact that I spend a lot of time reading about it. But I wouldn't know Zheng He if he blew me.
In reality, I don't know dick about "world" history. I know European and American history. In 21 years of formal schooling I have not once been exposed to any discussion of China. None. As I believe that I am representative of most Americans in this regard, the opening ceremonies made it clear that we know absolutely nothing about the largest nation on Earth. One out of every five people on the planet lives in China, the oldest civilization on the planet, and for all intents and purposes we Americans (and probably Europeans) know more about Albania. To us, China is communist, has a big wall, and gave the world Yao Ming, fortune cookies (which isn't even true), and General Tso's chicken. That's what we know.
This is corny, but I feel like China's stated mission of "introducing itself" to the world is an appropriate metaphor for these games. And "the world" – the overwhelmingly Eurocentric West in particular – sorely needs it. Maybe it doesn't need the cloying, coreographed, everything-is-perfect-and-harmonious face that China is presenting, but it does need to start paying more attention to the world's largest population, 3rd-largest economy, largest conventional military force, biggest industrial polluter, largest foreign holder of U.S. debt and dollars, and most prominent trading partner.
Perhaps I'm projecting my own ignorance, and in reality you and the rest of America are well-versed in Chinese history. Maybe Zheng He and his exploits are well-known to you and I'm a big dummy. It's likely, however, that you're in the dark too. Even though we can't learn much from China's idealized presentation of itself, I'm chastened by how little we do know.
(Given that I do not know Georgian, Russian, or Ossetian politics from my ass or a hole in the ground, I have called on a guest writer to say something intelligent. It seemed to work last time. What are the odds that I could find someone who studies Georgia? Scientists used Deep Blue to calculate them at 1 in 1,730,265. Well, suck it, science. I don't just know someone, I live with him. Without further ado, Mr. Scott "Aqua Velva Man" Nissen.)
Despite the media’s insistence that the political future of John Edwards (and, one assumes, his illegitimate child) and the vacation habits of Barack Obama are the most salient issues in the world today, a much more troubling event has been ongoing in a largely ignored region. On August 7th, the Russian military invaded South Ossetia, a small region in northern Georgia with separatist goals.
Before getting to the consequences of this action for Americans and the rest of the world, a little background is in order. Following the collapse of communism, the force that kept many separatist groups in check disappeared. Without the unifying force of communism (and the threat posed by the Red Army), many of the new states that emerged from Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union were unable to placate the separatist aspirations of many ethnic groups. As seen in Chechnya, Kosovo and Nagorno-Karabakh (I did not make that one up), the result has been some of the most savage conflicts in the post-Cold War era. Conflict erupted in South Ossetia almost immediately after Georgian independence in 1992, ending with a tense cease-fire that was maintained by Georgian, Russian and South Ossetian peacekeepers.
South Ossetia was largely peaceful until 2004, when the new Georgian government, brought to power in the Rose Revolution, cracked down on illegal activity in the region. This led to sporadic fighting between Georgian and South Ossetian troops, who were believed to be backed by the Russian military. American and limited European acknowledgement of Kosovo’s independence in February 2008 further destabilized Georgia's hold on South Ossetia. Recognizing separatists in Kosovo set a precedent, reducing the authority states have over breakaway regions. Needless to say, the tensions in South Ossetia have run high and increased significantly in recent years.
Everything came to a head on August 1st, when Georgian troops in South Ossetia were shelled by South Ossetian troops. The Georgian military responded by invading the region to quell the fighting, encountering intense resistance. Russia denies that the incident on August 1st occurred. A week later, the Russian military began bombing raids, first in South Ossetia and eventually on other targets in Georgia including an airfield near the Georgian capital of Tbilisi. As of today, it appears that Georgia is vacating the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali while Abkhazia, another separatist region within Georgia, may be taking advantage of this situation by attacking Georgian troops within Abkhazian borders.
What remains unclear is Russia’s rationale. Two motives have been widely speculated. First, Russia may have annexed South Ossetia to reunite it with North Ossetia, which is already part of Russia. They claim that approximately 90% of the people who live in South Ossetia carry a Russian passport and use Russian currency. Second, Moscow is troubled by former Soviet republics joining the EU and NATO. The three Baltic States have already joined both organizations while Ukraine and Georgia have received commitments from NATO about their future with the security organization. Russia may be trying to destabilize the Georgian state and military with the intention of making them ineligible for NATO membership.
It is important to note that Russia also has separatist problems of its own, most notably in Chechnya (which also borders Georgia). Although this conflict has cooled off in recent years, it does not make much sense for Russia to embolden Ossetian separatists in Georgia while trying to suppress Chechens a mere 200 miles away. Additionally, Russia’s standing in the international community has taken a big hit in recent years due to Vladimir Putin’s backsliding toward repression. Invading Georgia, which is significantly weaker, perceived to be a strong democracy, and a staunch ally of the West, can’t do much to help Russia’s tattered international image.
Why should we care that Russia is essentially steamrolling over an obscure country – besides the obvious loss of life and possibility of ethnic cleansing that comes with any armed conflict? There are three underreported ways in which this conflict might impact Americans directly. First, after the US and the UK, Georgia had the largest force in Iraq – roughly 2,000 troops on the ground. With the continued deterioration of the situation in South Ossetia, the Georgian government has asked that the United States airlift these troops back to Georgia. Unfortunately, this means that the military of another coalition partner (read: the US or UK) will, at least temporarily, have to fill that gap.
Second, oil markets will be further destabilized. A major pipeline links Central Asian oil fields with Western ports on the Mediterranean via Tbilisi. The Georgian government has said that the Russian Air Force is targeting the pipeline, a claim not yet substantiated by independent observers. However, the mere notion that the pipeline could be targeted may be enough for oil speculators to drive the price of oil to new record highs.
Finally, and this goes out to all of us enjoying the Summer Olympics in Beijing, guess where the 2014 Winter Olympics are being held? That’s right, Sochi, Russia, only about 150 miles from the newly demolished city of Tskhinvali. While I’m sure that the Russian government will be able to put on a wonderful show for the rest of the world, the specter of violence, instability, and the current conflict is likely to remain the region for many years.
Unfortunately, this conflict is getting the short shrift in the MSM even though we, and the region, may be feeling the consequences of it for some time. It may take the Russian army marching on Atlanta instead of Tbilisi for many Americans to actually take notice.
(Scott was compensated with a post-dated out-of-state bad check for $1,000 which stands no chance of being honored by any legitimate financial institution.)
