ginandtacos.com - shut up and drink the gin

HOW MUCH PENETRATION IS ENOUGH?

(Editor's note: let's get the giggles out of the way up front. 'Penetration.' Snicker.)

As most sentient beings have realized since mid-2005, war with Iran is essentially inevitable. Our Leader is "not prepared to leave the situation unresolved" and he's now touring VFW halls (ooh...tough crowd!) using the pre-Iraq fearmongering script almost word-for-word. But aside from the generalized concept of "war with Iran" and "another clusterfuck" I doubt many people have considered what's actually going to happen when the inevitable decision to attack is made.

First, let's lay out a couple of basic facts. Iran has no nuclear weapons at the moment. The surest proof is that Israel is not on fire. What they do have is a nuclear energy program, from which the imaginative mind (and thank god we have plenty of those at the top!) could extrapolate that they are enriching uranium (or, less likely, plutonium) for weapons use. Second, thanks to the four years of wasted resources and energy in Iraq, the American military is in no position to sustain another massive ground-war-and-occupation mission in an even more hostile country. So what are we going to see? Airstrikes. Lots of things falling from the sky and exploding. Because nothing says "AEI-funded warmonger with no balls" quite like lobbing cruise missiles from a few hundred miles away.

The linchpin of the Iranian nuclear program is the Natanz fuel enrichment site. I encourage you, rather than breezing past the link, to look at this map for a moment. If Iran is in fact attempting to build nuclear weapons, eliminating their ability to enrich weapons-grade U-235 is the surest way to quickly cripple the program. While enrichment could technically take place at a number of sites in Iran, there is little doubt that any such activity is centered around Natanz. Why? It's a huge and extraordinarily well-defended site. It's in the middle of nowhere and it's hardened. The majority of the facility, as the maps show you, is underground. It is at least 25 feet underground, covered by a thick layer of reinforced concrete and as much as 60 feet of compacted earth.

How would an airstrike reach such a well-protected target? Well, our friends in the military-industrial complex have created some neat toys that the media call "bunker-busting" bombs. Unfortunately, the limits of the most powerful of these weapons mean that destroying Natanz might still be difficult or impossible. The claimed limit of the top dog GBU-28 is "100 feet of earth or 20 feet of solid concrete." I see an "or" and not a "both", and the word "reinforced" is conspicuously absent prior to "concrete." No one can be certain just how hardened the Natanz facility is, but it's safe to say that the Iranians built it with an understanding of American strike capabilities.

So let's call the ability to destroy the site with "bunker busting" bombs questionable at best. For a President who "isn't prepared to leave the situation unresolved" that doesn't seem good enough. Fortunately the military has some other options.

While the "Robust Earth Penetrator" nuclear weapon project was cancelled in 2005, Jane's argues that it was simply continued under a different name or in the black budget. The other less-shadowy option is the B61 mk11 warhead, which has proven able to penetrate deep into the earth and destroy targets "several hundred feet" below ground in the ensuing nuclear blast. These two weapons, one rumored but the other quite real, are the only manner by which a hardened facility like Natanz could be destroyed with certainty.

So. In review.

FAILURE TO RESPECT STALL BOUNDARIES

I feel like ass and I'm psyching myself up for another round of tests, leeches, and bleeding tomorrow. So for tonight all you get is detailed information to assist your mockery of Larry Craig.

This news item starts out as the garden variety, but be sure to scroll past the story to read the complete, unedited police report at the end. 50 bonus points for whipping out a Senate business card as an ID, Larry.

What is it with these closeted Republicans and public bathrooms? I mean, for Christ's sake, I can't think of too many places that would preclude erection quite as definitively as the Minneapolis International Airport men's room. Are they aware that there are, you know, gay bars? Not to mention many other ways to practice "indiscretion," some of which are quite private.

VAYA CON DIOS

I don't really think there's much I can say about Alberto Gonzales or his resignation that hasn't been said repeatedly already. Combined with the fact that I feel like absolute ass today, I'll be keeping this as succinct as possible. Two things need to be said.

1. As much as firings and resignations in the Bush cabal feel like moral, or even substantive, victories, I find it hard to get excited. Remember when Rumsfeld got canned? It really changed things in the DoD. Right? No, of course it didn't. Nothing changed. Not a goddamn thing. We replaced one Kool-Aid drinking, true believing dead-ender with another. With the entire executive branch essentially being run out of think tanks and the Vice President's office, the names and faces among the cabinet are beyond interchangeable. They'll nominate some other automaton and there's no meaningful chance of getting the Senate to reject him as long as Joe "Yes sir, Mr. President!" Lieberman is the swing vote.

2. I see no reason why Alberto should get off the hook just because he quit. Lying to Congress and obstructing justice are, you know, felonies. He doesn't get to atone for his behavior simply by getting out of the way. It would be nice to send a message and give Gonzales a legacy...other than that goddamn "I just pumped the neighbor's cat" look which adorned his face for about 80% of his tenure.

I'd say something about Bush's "Why wait years before engaging in revisionist history?" farewell-Alberto speech, but I think it speaks for itself.

AN OPEN LETTER TO CHRIS TUCKER

Mr. Tucker,

I know you're a busy box office star, but hopefully you can spare a moment to accomodate this heartfelt letter. I've not had much luck getting in touch with celebrities - Paul Anka hasn't taken my calls in years - but after seeing trailers for Rush Hour 3 I just had to try. Anyone who hasn't seen said trailer is welcome to find it of their own accord; I will have no part in anyone's decision to view it.

Chris, do you feel good about what you do? Not "acting," but the roles you choose to take. Are you completely ignorant of how you're portrayed or are you in love with the paychecks while dying a little bit on the inside every time you cash one? I'd like to spend some time around you, Chris. For instance, I would love to be on set while the director of the Rush Hour trilogy instructs you in your stagecraft. How does he explain his vision? Does he say "Chris, are you familiar with the golliwog stereotype? That's what I need here."? Or perhaps he is more direct and omits any higher-level cultural references, i.e. "Make sure you bug out your eyes a lot and pout your lips."

What do your scripts look like? Do they have actual lines (other than the "jokes") or do they just have vague descriptions like "insert Negro jive-talk here; dance."? Do they use artificial means or post-production techniques to make your voice more squeaky, or are those your natural chops? I wonder what level of improvisation takes place between you and co-star Jackie Chan. Given that the three films consist of exactly one joke played out ad infinitum ("Wow, that colored fellow sure is different than Asians!") it would seem that the director would need to rely on your creativity to continually produce new variations.

But the most important question, Chris, is my last: is there anything you actually refuse to do in these scripts? Is there some low-water mark of your dignity below which you will not venture? Honestly, given what you do in these films I shudder to think about what you'd refuse. I mean, what is your limit? What's "too far" for Chris Tucker? Was it a scene in which you danced a soft-shoe in a Step'n Fetchit costume to the tune of "Funkytown"? Or was it something about you wearing buck teeth and Tojo glasses while pretending to be Asian?

I really hope I can get some clarification. I know why you do what you do: the paycheck. When you do have pangs of conscience, you tell yourself that if you refuse, someone else will do it. Undoubtedly this is true; the audience of Rush Hour 3 seems like the kind of folk who'd generally posit that all them coloreds look the same. I understand your motives, but I think they're unhealthy. At this pace it's essentially a foregone conclusion that you'll wake up one morning when you're fifty, ask the mirror "What have I done with my life?", and blow your brains out. It doesn't have to happen, Chris. Being Hollywood's go-to man for aping black stereotypes is a choice, not an obligation. I don't recommend a Chappelle-caliber freak out, but you might want to put a tiny bit more thought into what you're being asked to do.

Your biggest fan,
Ed

MORBID CURIOSITY

I have a particularly strong and morbid sense of curiosity, and I also have the unfortunate habit of thinking "What would I do in that situation?" as a standard reaction to observing things. This occasionally creeps people out, as normal people apparently don't read a book about the Oklahoma City bombing and think aloud "What would I have done if I was Timothy McVeigh?" It doesn't mean "I would like to be in that situation" but most people hear it that way. Oh well.

So I'm not going to lie, Dead Man Eating (also in blog form) is sort of my new favorite thing. It's an oddly obsessive compendium of the last meals of condemned prisoners. I often wonder which path I'd choose in that situation. On the one hand, I could attempt to enjoy one last sumptuous, earthly delight on the state's tab. On the other hand, I could have 30 White Castles and 2 gallons of scalding black coffee. Let's just say that would provide a big parting "fuck you" to the correctional system. I'd have people quitting their jobs over me.

Since Texas executes about 20 people for every one person executed elsewhere, I find that their Dept. of Corrections website is a virtual Wikipedia of creepy execution-related crap. If you go here you can read the last words of each prisoner, although the grand prize in that category (and here's where I bring the entry full-circle) goes to Thomas Grasso of Oklahoma. His last words were "I asked for Spaghetti-O's. I did not get my Spaghetti-O's, I got spaghetti. I want the press to know this."

This is the kind of stuff that entertains me when I can't leave the house for a week. Hopefully next week I will get back to posting as usual.

I WONDER IF THE SHAH IS STILL AVAILABLE

The tunes, they are a-changin'.

George W. Bush: a legacy of spreading democracy....well, um....autocracy, but with security....uh....military strongmen?

As those of us here in the reality-based community have known for 5 or 6 years, power and authority in Iraq are going to come down to whichever genocidal ethnic militia seems to have the largest proportion of the populace behind it. Those in the minority, well....devil take the hindmost, I suppose.

If it's any consolation to those who are about to lose the ethnic power struggle in Iraq, the minority in a democracy routinely gets bent over the barrel as well. You're not missing anything.

GOOD, THIS IS BAD.

So I got a call from a nice woman at the health department informing me that, in addition to Spotted Fever, I tested positive for West Nile Virus. Next summer I am having my blood replaced with insect repellent. Having fairly well thrashed the Spotted Fever, I was perplexed as to why I still felt like ass. I wonder no more, nor need I wonder why I am going to feel like shit for the next couple of months. Next summer I plan to get the bubonic plague, whooping cough, hysterical pregnancy, and possibly a case of dropsy.

In light of my stellar health and mood at the moment, I'll merely direct you to this (and please be sure to read all the way to the end) if you've yet to see it. Oh, and they've also got some interesting ideas about immigration. Lest anyone convince you that this person and his organization (Family Security Matters) are just some fringe wackos, they're a public front for the Center for Security Policy. Hi, Richard Perle!

Ladies and gentlemen, that's neoconservatism. Slavery, genocide, and an American dictatorship.

WHAT A WONDERFUL WORLD

This is why I hate libertarians. I did not hate them until very recently, when libertariansim apparently became quite trendy on campus. Nothing irritates me as quickly or as thoroughly as people hopping on ideological bandwagons without really understanding their new Deeply Held Beliefs.

Check out this neat little idea from the folks at the Ayn Rand Institute. They've solved the problem of long waiting lists for organ transplants. The solution, if you really need me to tell you, is to let the market handle it.

It's hard to pick out a most idiotic moment in this brilliant essay, so I'll pick out the most telling.

A person may reasonably decide, after considering the relevant facts (including the pain and risk of surgery), that selling an organ is in his own best interest. A father, for example, may decide that one of his kidneys is worth selling to pay for the best medical treatment available for his child.

I love how these people's minds work. When we take a hypothetical person who cannot afford "the best medical treatment," do we ask why medical treatment is so expensive? Do we ask why a large segment of society can't afford healthcare? No and no. We bring the out the Howard Roark in said person by letting him sell his kidneys to pay for his child's medical care.

That's the utopia for which these people strive - a world in which we "empower" the poor to take responsibility for their own well-being by freeing them to sell parts of their body to the Haves. To people like the staff of the Ayn Rand Institute, I assume. Beneath the thin sheen of populism that this "writer" feebly attempts to create is folksy social darwinism which holds that the poor are so useless to society that we can start extracting value from them...literally. What a great day that will be.

A WORLD OF NAILS

There are some things I prefer to avoid in my quest to dissect/ridicule everything on the face of the Earth that deserves it. Picking low-hanging fruit holds no allure for me. Posting repeatedly about topics like "Sean Hannity is stupid" or "Supply-side economics do not seem to work" would be remarkably tedious for both you and I. It's the political equivalent of "incisive" social commentators who write about how the Spice Girls are crap. If commentary makes every reader with an IQ over 90 say "Well, duh" at its conclusion, it isn't contributing anything to the collective discourse.

As with all declarations of principle, the preceding paragraph indicates that I am about to violate said principle.

Rudy Giuliani is stupid.

If you have 20 minutes and the content of your stomach to spare, check out America's Mayor (tm) doing some soapboxing for the usually-respected journal Foreign Affairs. His tutorial on Rudy Style foreign policy, bearing the appallingly inaccurate title "Toward a Realistic Peace," may just be the most intellectually dishonest, factually errant, and flat-out delusional assessment of reality I have ever seen. I don't even know where to begin. Let's start with Rudyvisionist History of the Cold War:

Our cultural and commercial influence can also have a positive impact. They did during the Cold War. The steadfast leadership of President Reagan, working alongside British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II, helped the Soviet Union understand that it could not bully the West into submission. Although such leadership was essential, alone it might not have toppled the Soviet Union in the time that it did. But it was effective because it came with Western economic investment and cultural influence that inspired people in the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries. Companies such as Pepsi, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, and Levi's helped win the Cold War by entering the Soviet market. Cultural events, such as Van Cliburn's concerts in the Soviet Union and Mstislav Rostropovich's in the United States, also hastened change.

Pretty standard right-wing Reagan and the Pope Defeated Communism tripe with a new twist...our Dear Leaders only softened up the Soviets. It was McDonald's and KFC that applied the killing blow. Try cracking a fucking history book, Rudy. If you read about, for example, Able Archer 83 (which I suspect America's Mayor has never even heard of) it would become perfectly clear that Reagan "help(ing) the Soviet Union understand that it could not bully the West into submission" is apparently Conservative Speak for "Bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war as a result of juvenile grandstanding combined with crushing ignorance of Soviet beliefs and motives." And Pope JP2 applauded the nice anti-Communists in Eastern Europe while suppressing enough troublemaking Latin American bishops to remind the world's uppity plebians that the fight against oppression of the soul has acceptable limits that suspiciously resemble the mission statement of the Cato Institute.

While you have that history book open, Rudy, you might want to double-check some of this:

America must remember one of the lessons of the Vietnam War. Then, as now, we fought a war with the wrong strategy for several years. And then, as now, we corrected course and began to show real progress. Many historians today believe that by about 1972 we and our South Vietnamese partners had succeeded in defeating the Vietcong insurgency and in setting South Vietnam on a path to political self-sufficiency. But America then withdrew its support, allowing the communist North to conquer the South. The consequences were dire, and not only in Vietnam: numerous deaths in places such as the killing fields of Cambodia, a newly energized and expansionist Soviet Union, and a weaker America. The consequences of abandoning Iraq would be worse.

Before one starts lecturing the nation on remembering the lessons of Vietnam, it might be a good idea to learn what those lessons actually are. Ignoring the more obvious and "fact-based" lessons about the incompatibility of using a large, mechanized military for counterinsurgency operations or trying to dictate the outcome of indigenous conflicts by winning "hearts and minds," Rudy jumps straight to George Bush's classic "We lost because we quit" trope. The moral of Iraq, according to Giuliani, is apparently that we'll win as long as we stick it out for 20 or 30 years - long enough to kill off the entire adult population and replace them with a generation raised on the Cold War essentials like KFC and Coke.

But let's get off of history for a moment. OK, Rudy doesn't understand history. What about his vision for the future?

The U.S. Army needs a minimum of ten new combat brigades. It may need more, but this is an appropriate baseline increase while we reevaluate our strategies and resources. We must also take a hard look at other requirements, especially in terms of submarines, modern long-range bombers, and in-flight refueling tankers. Rebuilding will not be cheap, but it is necessary. And the benefits will outweigh the costs.

And do what with it, Rudy? Just build up a massive, utterly unrealisitically large military (aren't we having some trouble recruiting?) and then hand it over to neocons. Right. That's what we need: to give these nitwits more troops, more weapons, and more money. Second, note his (typical middle-aged white guy) fascination with hardware. America just needs more toys. More space-aged technological marvels. Long-range bombers. Subs. ICBMs. Laser ray-guns. For what, Rudy? To fight a guerilla enemy? Are we failing in Iraq and Afghanistan because of a dearth of long-range bombers and submarines? No, Rudy doesn't want to spend unfathomable amounts of money (leaving a bill to everyone under 30) on these toys because we need them for any specific "reason" or "objective." It's just the usual suburban conservative obsession with things that fly high, explode and, eventually, make great new episodes of Wings and stock footage for everything else on the Military Channel. Rudy's subs-and-bombers agenda isn't about winning wars. It's about providing shiny erectile dysfunction aids to lard-assed suburban white guys who can't get enough of watching bombs fall.

In summary, Rudy uses this extended piece to showcase the fact that he knows absolutely nothing about history, the present, or foreign policy...right before he lays out a plan to give himself more military power and capability than any human has ever had. More "long-range bombers" are the last thing we need in the hands of people whose tiny minds already can't conceive of any solutions to problems that don't involve air strikes. When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail.

THE FINAL FRONTIER, ETC.

So I really liked the format of last week's Harry Potter: WTF entry. I bring up something that puzzles me, and the comments leap into the breach to clear the air. I liked it so much I may make a habit out of it.

Why don't people give a shit about the space program anymore? I understand the obvious arguments about the exorbitant costs outweighing the benefits combined with the lack of "exciting" new developments akin to landing on the moon. But....the idea of sending people into space is really cool. I can't argue that it's productive, efficient, or worth anything at all to society. But I refuse to say that it's not kinda neat.

I understand why people think it's a stupid waste of money, but I don't understand why spacewalks aren't worth 20 seconds on the news. When I was a youngin' we used to get out of class to watch Space Shuttle launches (and let me tell you, that policy fuckin' backfired when a bunch of 7 year-olds were confronted with an exploding Challenger) and now I don't think anyone even realizes when it happens. It's pretty sad, in my humble opinion, that we're so jaded. I'm not sure what it'll take to impress people these days, but apparently launching humans into the vacuum of space and returning them to Earth safely (most of the time) just doesn't cut it.

Am I just puerile and easily amused or is the idea of sustaining life in space still, you know, worth an occasional moment of awe?

BOY GENIUS

You haven't seen a nauseating paean to Karl Rove until you've seen Fred Barnes' nauseating paean to Karl Rove. I don't recommend reading that in its entirety; it's akin to eating a stick of butter rolled in saccharine. Among the cloying highlights:

Rove is the greatest political mind of his generation and probably of any generation. He not only is a breathtakingly smart strategist but also a clever tactician. He knows history, understands the moods of the public, and is a visionary on matters of public policy. (emphasis added)

Can you even imagine writing such horseshit for a living? I think it's safe to say that Fred wrote this one with only one hand on the keyboard. If you catch my drift. And I think you do. This is one of those columns that calls to mind Steve Albini and his "Three pandering sluts" rant: I wonder how Fred Barnes will feel if he clips this piece, puts it in a time capsule, and opens it in 10 years. His sentiments might have made sense as a knee-jerk emotional reaction immediately after Rove's resignation, but once he's done rubbing one out I wonder how proud he will be of what he's written here.

It's an awful lot like flogging a dead horse to point out how idiotic the "Rove is a Genius" trope is when viewed through the lens of reality. What Barnes called the greatest political mind "of any generation" was the "architect" of getting a President re-elected by the skin of his teeth as a wartime incumbent. Wow. I mean, what are the odds? Believe it or not, the historical odds were....100%. Nixon '72. FDR. Wilson 1916. Lincoln 1864. Incumbent presidents simply don't lose elections during wartime. Yet the "brilliant" architect Rove managed the herculean feat of getting one such president re-elected over a horrendous challenger by 1% of the popular vote. Wow. Amazing. True, history would suggest that he should have won by 15%. But the reality-based community misses the point by focusing on such irrelevant "facts."

And how about that "permanent Republican majority" that lasted all of two years? Actually, Karl, we call what happened in 2004 the coattail effect, and it's been identified and studied in political science since approximately the dawn of time. The GOP gained three fucking seats in the House in 2004. Yet the media unhinged its jaw like a snake to swallow more and more of the Ain't Rove a Genius propaganda shoveled toward it. In other words, what happened in 2004 was exactly what 200 years of history would predict. The GOP could have used a rock or an incontinent bear as a strategist and gotten the exact same result.

Let's be clear: Karl Rove is a myopic bag of fluid with a 5th-grade understanding of the political world. Calling him a genius based on what happened in 2004 is akin to applauding a shaman for having succeeded in making the sun rise. His constant pandering to the lowest common denominator and his ridiculous overestimation of the number of far-right religious nutcases in the electorate has set his party back years. If he's a genius, he's a genius along the lines of Charles Keating, Bill Buckner or FEMA in New Orleans. That is, he's noteworthy only for his seemingly preternatural ability to fail spectacularly.

MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE

While I did a pretty good job of letting my inner eight year-old dominate my reaction to the recent Transformers film, rest assured that my inner dickhead did not take those 2 hours off. OK, 6 hours. I saw it thrice. Shut up.

Like all movies that require (or think they require) the consent of our armed forces in order to film all the neat toys at the DoD's disposal, Transformers devoted a good portion of its first hour to giving our military an enthusiastic handjob. Nothing excites the Army quite like a captive audience of young males waiting to have their basest instincts stimulated, be it by giant anthropomorphic robots or shiny military hardware. Hence the first hour of the film bore a stunning resemblance to some combination of a toy commercial, an episode of Futureweapons, and those 5-minute gee-ain't-the-army-neat commercials that precede most films these days. The editing of some scenes left me wondering if there was actually someone from the Army in the editing room with Michael Bay ("OK, now do a close-up on the Predator UAV....now pan in on the A-10s......pull back and let's see those Raptors. Perfect.")

But the most gratuitous "product" placement award has to go to the backlit movement close-ups on the Army's new V-22 Osprey. It transforms from a helicopter into an airplane. Did you see that, kids? Real live Transformers, and the Army's got'em! Boy, I bet you can't wait to enlist! Those fat cats in Congress won't let us put your name on the recruiting list yet because you're only 10, but rest assured we'll find a loophole around that silly rule.

Not pictured: Optimus Prime, effective Congressional oversight

What you see in the film is two sleek-looking black Ospreys dashing across the sky to save the day or something like that. What you don't see is the dozens of lives and $30 billion in development costs necessary to bring you that Michael Bay eye candy, nor the paper trail of what is undoubtedly the biggest boondoggle/white elephant/choose your metaphor in recent history. Bill Proxmire might need to crawl through the Earth to hand the entire project a special edition of his Golden Fleece awards.

The V-22 was borne of an idea that has danced magically in the minds of the military for more than five decades: something that can take off vertically (eliminating the need for a runway) and hover over a battlefield like a helicopter while retaining the speed and range of a fixed-wing aircraft. Money was shoveled into black holes like the X-22 project and the more recent XV-15 (the immediate forerunner of the V-22) with no feasible solution to the problems inherent in the tiltrotor design. Give the Army folks credit for one thing: they refuse to allow reality or staggering costs to impede their vision.

Encouraged (for some reason) by the XV-15 test program, Congress allocated a development budget of $2.5 billion for the production V-22 in 1986. Within two years, the project's costs managed to climb to $30 billion. To his credit, then-Defense Secretary Cheney zeroed out the budget on what was clearly going to become a monument to cost overruns, but Congress pressed ahead with funding thanks to the enormous political influence of primary contractors Boeing and Bell Helicopter.

The early years of the program were hounded by the enormous technical complexity of the aircraft and the growing realization that the production models would be ass-breakingly expensive. Faced with a massive budget and a design that, well, simply didn't seem to work, so began a decade of follies.

AN OPEN LETTER TO AMERICA'S PHARMACISTS

Dear Pharmacist,

You are a valued part of America's healthcare apparatus. You stand behind your slightly-elevated counter, accept our illegibile prescriptions, and dole out the portion of your magical collection to which we are entitled. We count on you. We count on you to tell us about drug interactions, to alert us to cheaper generic options, and to help us navigate the world of prescription co-pays. For all of this we thank you.

What we explicitly do not count on you for is moral guidance. As valued of a member of our healthcare chain as you are, you are essentially a turnkey. We hand you a slip of paper, you hand us something we can't be trusted to get ourselves. Fine. We accept the need for the pharmacist-as-middleman. But middlemen you are. We don't want to argue with you, lecture you, be lectured by you, or experience delays on account of your hissy fits/moral grandstanding.

In short, when we enter a pharmacy with a prescription - be it for narcotic painkillers, simple antibiotics, or, yes, emergency contraception - your job is to fill it, at which point we go our separate ways. Any necessary hand-wringing or moral pondering has long since been completed in the appropriate environment: the doctor's office. If you are "unable" to give us a prescription, the necessity of which has already been determined by doctor and patient, well, frankly, you're not much good to us. Your job is simple and clear, as is the line between doing it well and not doing it at all. You are important, but keep it in perspective. You are important like the Quartermaster is important to the Army; on the one hand, everyone in the Army depends on the guy who gives them bullets. On the other hand, the job of handing out bullets could be performed by a properly-motivated chimpanzee.

In closing, your job is important to us. So either do it or get the hell out of the way for someone who will. Plenty of other careers can accomodate your phony, painfully misinformed moral rectitude.

Regards,
Ed

(Feel free to print this and hand it to your uppity Wal-Mart pharmacist of choice)

ROLE REVERSAL

I'm pretty happy with this blog. I write long, rambling brain-dumps and the astute readers leave succinct comments. Today - partly because I'm still sick as shit and partly because it fits the issue - we shall reverse the roles.

I don't get Harry Potter. Someone explain the Harry Potter thing to me. Really. Please. I'm begging. I understand why children flip out over these things, but watching adults go bat-shit insane over what is essentially a new version of the same kind of story told in children's literature for 200 years is....disturbing. You can go on and on about what fabulous writing this is, and I will not believe you. You can tell me how creative and original the story is, and you will be wrong.

I picked up one of the novels way back when the fad first started, and I was absolutely bored shitless after about 50 pages. There was nothing wrong with it, but I was 23 and reading a book intended for 9 year olds. I really shouldn't have been entertained by it any more than I should be entertained by Sesame Street. There ended my experiment with the "novels", although I did have the colossal misfortune of seeing two of the films against my will. Calling them "unwatchable" is exceptionally generous.

Methinks this is just another example of the power of mass hysteria combined with the sad, sad fact that adult America reads at approximately a 4th-grade level. So please, Harry Potter fans (zing!), explain this to me.

PERSONAL AD

28 y/o white male graduate student. I enjoy the outdoors, long walks on the beach, and contracting exotic diseases. Seeking S/DF (race and age unimportant) to share in these adventures with me. NS only.

So a specialist in infectious diseases has determined I have something called Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever. It is tick-borne and found in AZ, CO, UT, and NM (i.e. where I just vacationed). Having enjoyed the RMSF experience for 5 days, I must regrettably report that I do not recommend it. While it is the most effective diet plan I've ever encountered ("You too can lose 20 pounds - in five days! With no diet or exercise!") it carries with it too much baggage.

I will not go into the gory details of what this tiny bacteria has made my body do lately, but let's just say that my doctor was really excited when my fever got down to 102 this morning.

I'll get back to the usual entries as soon as possible - hopefully tomorrow.

SO IT'S COME TO THIS, PART 2

So the medical community is convinced I have the Hanta virus or meningitis. I confess that I've always wondered how I'd feel after hearing the phrase "We're not sure if you have the Hanta virus or meningitis" uttered in reference to me. As it turns out, it did not make me happy and I wished I hadn't heard it. But by then it was too late to prevent it.

Two updates on two stories, one very old and one very recent:

1. 2005 Ginandtacos Cocksucker of the Year Dennis Miller is now a Fox News contributor. If there is any more telling sign that someone has lost all credibility, I don't know what it is. Most semi-respectable right-wing commentators can hold down a job as "Token Republican" on CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc. But when one is so desperate for a paycheck that he or she becomes another right-wing parrot on the Jerry Springer of journalism, well, that's a good sign that you're out of options. Get a nasty letter from the IRS, Dennis?

2. Looks like the recent experiment has made (a portion of) California come to its senses about Electro-Mechanical Fraud Boxes. They won't be used in LA County. Well that's a darn shame. They're just so efficient!

Chicagoland Exurbs

Get well soon Ed!

We have a lot of readers from Chicago(land), and I just want to drop a quick mention of a nytimes magazine article on Carpentersville, Il. attempt to make life miserable for immigrants. There has been a lot written about local politics and immigration; this is interesting because (1) in some ways it is removed from the real hot flashes of immigration and (2) you get to see how slippery the "English First" arguments, especially when turned into law, turn into "We Don't want Lower-Class people around!" which turn into "We Hate Hispanics."

Confession: I used to work around that area, and I even worked in one of the companies name-dropped (Motorola) for people looking to buy in Carpentersville (I knew several buyers there). It struck me as a town that was created as a satellite city for the booming centers of Schaumburg - one patch of housing for the executives, and one patch of housing for the service industry workings filling out the rest of the labor force (Two Americas!).

As such, it was built on that uniquely American combination of "cheap land, cheaper foreign capital, and even cheaper illegal labor" equation for city planning. The idea that their "culture" (which is poorly defined outside of English speaking and flag waving) is worth passing repressive, anti-business and anti-community laws to save (as if that was even the stakes) is completely beyond me.

ED VS. THE HANTAVIRUS

So when my fever climbed to 104.1 on Wednesday evening, I realized that medical attention was needed (*someone* was wise enough to tell me so). Unfortunately by then I could not move. After graciously being ferried to the ER, 2 Liters of saline and anti-emetics brought my temperature down....to 102.

Apparently I brought back a souvenir from the desert southwest.

As I am still exceedingly febrile and have no home internet access, No Politics Friday probably won't happen. I'll try to compensate this weekend.

Damn rodents.

2008 SENATE RACES: COMPETITIVE SEATS, PART ONE

As I discussed earlier in my Senate 2008 introduction, there are very few competitive races to be found in 2008. The GOP is at a disadvantage due to the fact that it must defend 21 of the 33 seats up for grabs, but many are in the deep south and legitimate Democratic challenges are unlikely. In the last piece, I counted 7 races that look highly competitive.

Make it 8. After Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens' home (the same home that was allegedly and illegally lavished with remodeling work by contractors) was raided by the FBI, the odds of the octogenarian even running again (let alone being safe) are nil. Today I'll offer a brief introduction to the first four competitive races and offer early predictions.

1. Colorado (Wayne Allard, R, retiring) - Sen. Allard is keeping his word to limit himself for two terms. The state GOP tried badly to woo former Broncos superstar John Elway (the GOP is always against celebrities until it finds some that carry water for it) and former Governor Bill Owens. The latter would have been formidable, but he doesn't like the odds for the GOP in 2008. Smart man.

The Democrats will be represented by Congressman Mark Udall, a very high-quality challenger. If the GOP cannot put up a better candidate than the current choices (former Congressman Bob Schaeffer and a local Denver talk show host) this race, which should be close, could turn into a laugher.
Prediction: leaning D

2. Maine (Susan Collins, R) - Collins, W's bestest of buddies in the Senate, is trying very hard to play the part of the moderate with her voting record for the last few months. I take that as a clear sign that she understands that she is in trouble. Collins remains personally popular, but a GOP Senator in a fairly "blue" state can't consider herself safe by any means. The Democrats look to counter with Congressman Tom Allen; his success will hinge on getting voters to pay attention to Collins' party rather than Collins herself.
Prediction: Collins retains seat

3. Minnesota (Norm Coleman, R) - In the past 8 years, the Democrats have had a field day in the land of 10,000 lakes. Professional nobody Amy Klobuchar handily defeated GOP incumbent Mark Kennedy in the 2006 Senate race, and Coleman has never been considered safe. This is a seat the GOP knows it is lucky to have and will have to fight to retain. The wild card, of course, is whether Al Franken wins the Democratic nomination. Financially he is the 900-pound gorilla in this race. If he is nominated, the race will be entertaining if nothing else.
Prediction: Coin flip until Democratic nominee is determined

4. Alaska (Ted Stevens, R) - Series of Tubes will be 85 in 2008, and his son has already been indicted for taking a quarter-million dollars in bribes. With the recent "suprise visit" to the Stevens home from the IRS and FBI, I'd have to imagine that Teddy is going to retire. He has adamantly denied any intention of doing so, but that was before he stood ready to be indicted. It would appear to be in the GOP's interest to replace him. Unfortunately, Congressman Don "Bridge to Nowhere" Young is also on the cusp of being indicted. Whoops.

Stevens has won several times in some of the most lopsided blowouts in recent Senate history (78% in 2002). It is a very conservative state. However, absent Young and Stevens I fail to see another good GOP nominee (Sarah Pralin has been governor for about 3 minutes), whereas the Democrats are going to run popular Anchorage mayor Mark Begich. It's still a longshot, but this race feels (12 months out) like Webb-Allen felt a year in advance of the 2006 race: one's immediate reaction is to say "No way will the D's take that one" but the right challenger, the right technique, and the right amount of resources (i.e. every damn cent the party can give him) could turn the tide.
Prediction: GOP retains seat by a hair; Democrats become slight favorites if Stevens or Young are formally indicted.

That's all for now, but there's plenty more to talk about. Take any predictions with a grain of salt at this point; in many instances the nominees aren't even settled yet, and a lot can change on the national scale in 14 months.

SO IT'S COME TO THIS

Last week I had the fortune/misfortune* of visiting Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado. Through a series of machinations I needn't elaborate here, I ended up "filling in" for one of two park rangers guiding a tour group to the (stunning) ruins. As such, the (real) ranger briefly introduced me and noted my day job in the Political Science department at IU.

At the conclusion of the tour, a very sunburnt gentleman with an overpowering Dixie accent (I'd soon learn that he hails from Birmingham, AL) approached me quite urgently and said "I need to know who you think is going to win the presidential election." Taken slightly aback, I gave him a thoroughly noncommittal but accurate answer: it's too early to say, but the lay of the land certainly looks unfavorable for the GOP. However, the nomination of Hillary Clinton could be a wild-card because of her high negative numbers.

Following that stock response, he began to unburden himself in what I have decided to call the Republican Unburdening of the Soul ritual. He started telling me about how he is an upper-middle class (pilot for NW Airlines, apparently) white guy from the Bible Belt who has been a Republican since he could walk, he voted for George Bush (twice), he supported the War in Iraq, etc etc. But the RUotS always ends as familiarly as it begins. After describing his lifelong committment to Republican principles, he revealed that he now despises George W. Bush and loathes the failed Iraq debacle.

I have decided to name this ritual because it is happening so damn frequently lately. Its source is quite obvious: a major, major case of the guilts coupled with the embarassment of having been misled (or having deluded oneself) so thoroughly and easily. I swear to God, today's average Republican cannot avoid telling every liberal they meet how much they hate the war and the president. They're like sinners desperately seeking absolution and willing to solicit it from strangers. Failing absolution, they'll settle for conscience balm. Both ordinary people and elected officials (note the "rats fleeing a sinking ship" Senators like Lugar suddenly condemning the war they blindly supported for 4 years) are performing the RUotS lately.

Back to this gentleman, I (gently, and as non-confrontationally as possible) joked that I can't figure out why he voted for Bush a second time if he felt this way. He replied that his faith in the party and its principles was strong enough to trust Bush with more time to achieve a favorable outcome. While this is singularly piss-poor logic, I nonetheless understood his response as a reasonable emotional one. Then he said something that floored me in several respects:

"See, you (meaning 'liberals', even though I had not offered him any political affiliation; all academics are liberals) hate George Bush because he represents everything you hate. I hate George Bush because he represents everything I believe in being completely fucked up and ruined."

The profundity of that struck me. I've not yet heard a more concise, eloquent explanation of what the non-brainwashed part of the right-leaning electorate is experiencing these days. It also struck me as incredible that this is what political discourse v2007 sounds like: two people of opposing ideologies arguing about who hates George Bush more.

Unfortunately but predictably, the conversation ended with him describing his openness to Democratic candidates in 2008....but not without the caveat of his hatred of Hillary Clinton. And therein lies the disingenuousness of the RUotS ritual and conservative hand-wringing in general. They're like fat people who are always about to start dieting and exercising "tomorrow." They go on and on about how much they hate Bush, the war, and their more extreme party compatriots...but not without conjuring up a reason to vote for them again anyway. In short, this gentleman told me that he's completely disillusioned with his party while implying "I will use HRC as an excuse to vote for them again anyway."

It's a very convenient, and cowardly, coulda-woulda-shoulda defense. "I was totally ready to jump ship, but that Hillary Clinton was just too awful so I had to vote for the guy who baited me with more tax cuts." Pardon me if, under such qualified circumstances, I decline to end such conversations with "Ego te absolvo, my son."

*Mesa Verde belongs on that list of parks (Yellowstone, Rocky Mountain, Grand Canyon, etc) that a real outdoorsperson simply cannot visit between Memorial and Labor Days. It was just overwhelmed with traffic and lard-assed suburban white guys dragging their 5 miserable children around the country in a Suburban loudly wondering why they had to walk so far to see the ruins. Anyone looking for solitude and natural splendor finds this intolerable. In contrast, I spent 2 days at the nearby (and nearly as incredible) Chaco Canyon and was essentially the only person there.