Wasilla = Tikrit?

Reading about Sarah Palin, in today's New York Times, I couldn't help but get the feeling that this could be the story of any ruling clan in an Arab Petro-dictatorship. Really, the home-town cabal, sham integrity, and personal ruthlessness are Baath-rific, but without the secularism...

Certainly, that would give more context to SP's bizarre "That's the beauty of Democracy, Charlie" response on ABC... It was the winking rumination upon popular rule typical of the charismatic, strongman who regularly has to sit down with journalists and put on some window dressing.

Really, you're just not that interesting

"PW daily called it a “memoir,” a word that makes my skin crawl and which apparently makes everyone else’s skin crawl, too. What is a 26 year old who hasn’t overcome an addiction or been a child soldier doing writing a MEMOIR? But it’s hard to figure out what else to call a book of autobiographical stories, I guess. That is a few too many words to fit onto a computer screen, apparently."

Monkey and I used to hold down office jobs.

As you can see, that has left Monkey an angry, brain-addled and rambling wayfarer and, as for me, I am just bitter and cling to elemental hatreds.


It has come to our attention recently, that the French National Assembly voted to effectively gut the 35-hour work week that figured among the crowning achievements of the incomparable Jospin government. Further, French employees have seen their work year take on added days. From where I sit, the prospect of more mandated office hours can only result in an explosion of time-wasting never before witnessed.

This wasted time will undoubtedly come in the perverse form of needless e-mails.

Somewhere along the way, e-mail became a substitute for work. At one point, I was paid to do things that involved, for example, knowing something about what was going on in the world. (Thank G_d that I can do it for free, now.) In fact, one of the offices I occupied -- occasionally zoning out just to make sure my screensaver still worked -- actually had a compilation of news stories with links relevant to our stock-in-trade that were sent out daily and arrived surely and conveniently in all our mailboxes. Often, we would have people with glorified titles like Something Assistant or Intern compile or summarize news stories from regional press sources so that we could have an overview with what was going on in our particular corner of the world. But, of course, being specialists in some sense of the word, we also kept abreast of our regions and sources ourselves -- after all, why work in a gray matter field if one is to remain uninterested and remain at a distance from the subject of one's predilection.

Inevitably, though, there was the brave soul who would work at home starting somewhere around 5:00 AM. This usually consisted in sending links to the office or to a particular division of important or must-read stories. Sometimes, one is tempted to indicate that one subscribes to the Washington Post -- but the spirit of cooperation precludes such earnestness. I believe it dawned on me at some point that it was perfectly acceptable and an oft practiced work habit to arrive at the office not having read the paper -- which naturally explained, I suppose, the usefulness of having someone to point out to you what you should be reading as opposed to what you want to read. What a revelation, though, to learn that it was entirely ethical to use the first couple of hours of the day to drink coffee and read the news online. How different and unscandalously divine. And -- on those days where you wanted to hit the breakfast buffet at Reeves -- why not just e-mail a couple of articles to your colleagues before 7, and then, you can step into the office guilt free at 10 or 10:30 having already finished some work for the day.

I can't say, though, that it didn't induce a cringe on those days when a helpful colleague would shoot me an e-mail linking to a story specifically about my own sub-region or whatever it was that I was doing. As if to say, "See, I could be doing your job and mine all at the same time." Although the message would always innocently query, "Did you see this?" Seriously, I should think that I can keep up on my own little patch of gray. That is, after all, why I am so paid.

But that, thankfully, is all in the past.




No frustrations with office e-mail though could have ever prepared me for the nightmare that now confronts me -- here in the ivory tower -- in the form of Listservs.

It's not like I haven't confronted Listservs before. I believe my first experience of having a stable e-mail address -- sometime shortly before the turn of the century -- was almost immediately followed by the action of subscribing to some kind of Turkistan digest. Before I knew it, I was in the midst of internecine conflicts between Turkmen and Uzbek, an overflow of flaming, retaliatory e-mails in rambling Turkish touching on the American genocide of "Turkish Redskins" in the New World -- and occasionally, the thunder clouds would break, and a glimmer of information about the Azeri opposition or an oil contract in Kazakhstan would shine through with the hypnotic iradescence of an opal. In spite of these rare gems, it did not take long to understand that a Listserv is more burden than blessing... but inertia prevents a prompt unsubscribe. Instead, I eventually dropped that e-mail address and the Turkistan digest surely kept chugging along in its infinite querelousness.

Now, in the world of "Big Grad" one is required not only to enlist in Facebook, but also to participate in various Listservs. Nothing could be more depressing. Not only that, but through some stupid notion that I'd be engaged in some sort of productive dialogue, I actually subscribed to an additional THREE Obama-based Listservs (on a digest-basis, of course; I'm not that dumb.) The result is a useless bombardment everyday reminding me of the superfluousness of Web communications.

Amidst this continuous tintinabullation the screech of my departmental Listserv stands out in terms of odiousness and self-absorption. Perhaps I would be fine if there were just a constant drone of calls-for-papers for which I am woefully un-prepared. Perhaps, the course announcements for seminars which sound tempting but could not possibly fit my schedule would settle comfortably in my knotted innards. But does anything justify the constant ringing of small-minded voices saying, essentially, "I am here."



First, there's a reason I don't subscribe to the Nation. I do not consider it to be a source that informs my particular viewpoint. But let's ignore that for now and focus on the true abuses...

FOR G_D'S SAKE!!!!!!! CAN YOU NOT CONGRATULATE SOMEONE INDIVIDUALLY. WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING REPLYING TO SOMEONE'S JOB SEARCH BEARING FRUIT BY PROVING TO THE ENTIRE FRICKIN' DEPARTMENT THAT YOU ARE HAPPY FOR THEM. THIS IS THE MOST VAIN AND USELESS ABUSE OF LISTSERV HUMANLY POSSIBLE. IF YOU ARE TOOOO BUSY WITH YOUR RESEARCH TO VOLUNTEER, THEN SURELY YOU ARE TOO BUSY TO FRICKIN' TAKE THE TIME OUT OF YOUR DAY TO TELL EVERYONE HOW HAPPY YOU ARE TO SUPPORT YOUR COLLEAGUES. YOU MAKE ME SICK!!!!!

I apologize. That message was intended for the person who has, since April (I inadvertently deleted all evidence dated January to March) who has sent such useless comments to the departmental listerv as:

"Congratulations, Dr. _______ indeed!!"

"thank you for sharing this article"

"great issue, ______ staff!!"

"a tasteful tribute site as well."

"Congratulations, dr. [stupid nickname]! the university of [look at how awful and stupid I am] is lucky to have you."

And he has also found the time to forward FOUR articles from the New York Times.



Seriously, every time I see his name on a Listserv e-mail I become apoplectic. And, the thing is, not ONE (OK, maybe TWO) other grad student actually abuses the Listserv in this inane, narcissistic manner. Nobody cares if you want to congratulate Abner! You know, if I knew Abner, I would probably send him a PERSONAL message or CALL HIM to offer congratulations. But you -- you insist on having the world witness your magnanimity. This serial Listserv piggy-backing ruins the usefulness of such a tool for EVERYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You make me barf.

Reminder: A Day without Scarves

Tomorrow, June 21 is the day we have declared action against the Oppressive Dunkin Donuts Regime (ODDR). Here's how you can make your voice heard:

1. DO NOT wear a scarf, no matter how tempted you are to accessorize.
2. Go to the nearest Dunkin Donuts.
3. Order a "Deici Frapped Mochislamofascichino."
4. When asked to repeat your order, ask for one dozen maple frosted donuts (may be replaced by French crullers and/or chocolate honey-dipped.
5. Pay in cash.
6. Include with your payment, a 3X5 yellow index card with the words "Free Rachael Ray's paisley scarf!" written on either side.
   
7. Once you have your Donuts and change, leave the store.
8. Eat the Donuts.
   
9. DO NOT put a scarf on even after leaving the store and returning home.
10. Repeat steps 1-9 as necessary.
    

Thank you for your cooperation. Together, we can defeat the forces of xenophobia and racism in our midst (unless they happen to be the Italian national team, in which case we will be forced to tolerate them for 90 incredibly boring and frustratingly sad minutes.)

Cosi Fan Frutti

I generally refrain from using the word "Gay" unless I am talking about my 2nd favorite movie, Zorro the Gay Blade. Many people (some of my best friends) tell me that the G-Word can be a hurtful slur, especially when used to describe things that are actually homosexual -- like batteries, celibate fish, and marriage -- and even moreso when used pejoratively.

But, as anybody who tried to communicate with me during the Euro 2000 France-Italy final knows, I think the Azzurri are totally gay! They ruin the game. And I hate them.

10 Things I hate about you

Like many young Americans who are trying to enjoy History today, I am finding there is something stuck in my craw. And it is making odd scratching noises as I get all choked up and teary eyed, singing Wind Beneath My Wings while thinking about Barack Obama.

Ah, yes... it must be the fact that Hillary Clinton has already begun the 2012 campaign.

Now, there are times when it is important to leave well enough alone. But that time is not now. As an avid reader of advice columns, I recognize that now, more than ever, it is time to stage an intervention. In fact, the bunker relationship of Clinton and her supporters, bears all the signs of emotional abuse. Indeed, her supporters are clearly victims of narcissism.

In the advice columns, one finds the evidence of this particularly poisonous relationship in the Best Friend Conundrum or the In-Law Standoff. It generally goes something like:

I've been friends with Chuck and Blair since we all met in college a few years ago. Since that time, Chuck and Blair began going out together, but things recently deteriorated and they went through a messy breakup. I value my friendships with both of them, but in my recent meetings with Blair, she has told me some awful things about how Chuck treated her and specifically requested that, if I want to keep my friendship with her, I will cut off contact with Chuck. I want to be supportive of Blair, but I have also heard different versions of the break-up from some of Blair's other friends. What should I do?

Or:

I am very close to my family and live a few hours away. As a result, I usually devote about one weekend per month to visiting them. I have recently become engaged to a guy who is all that. The initial meet-and-greet with my parents went over well, however, following the previous two monthly visits at my parents house, my fiance spent the entire drive back talking about how disrespectful my parents behaved toward him. To be honest, this takes me by surprise, since I didn't notice anything off about how they treated him, but he insists that I am too close to them to notice the slights he has picked up on and then proceeds to review with me in detail. It is now a few days before our next planned visit, and he has become increasingly irritable as the date approaches and has asked if we can call the trip off. I have offered to make excuses for him and go by myself, but he protests that this would send the wrong message to my parents and has said that if I really loved him, I would stand up to them about the way they treat him. I'd like to defend him, but I really have no idea how to when I honestly cannot see what they have done wrong. What do I do?

For a while, I have wondered why the Clinton supporters were so angry and how they managed to maintain their furor despite the lack of empirical support for Clinton's claims of wrongdoing on the part of the Obama campaign and the media. Only last night's speech and its specific location -- sealed off from cell-phone, Internet, and televisual communication -- revealed to me the truth: Clinton is manipulating and abusing her supporters in order to keep them from leaving her for Barack Obama.

As most advice columnists will point out, whether the abuse or manipulation is conscious or not is irrelevant. A narcissist genuinely believes that he or she is constantly being persecuted either by a real or constructed rival for the constant attention and validation he or she seeks, or due to his or her grandiose status, of which the rest of humanity is intolerant or envious.

A narcissistic abuser, as advice columnists will point out, will try to cut off his or her victim from information, construct false narratives of victimization (e.g. "Your father told me that I wouldn't make enough money as a professional blogger to support your lifestyle"; "The media has kept me down because I'm a woman.") and apply rules arbitrarily such that they are to their advantage (e.g. "Blair made Chuck systematically go through his photo albums and e-mail account to delete any photo, message or reference involving his exes, but she still regularly meets with several of her ex-boyfriends"; or "You owe it to me to give me all the delegates from the primary we agreed not to contest in Michigan, but you shouldn't have any, because they didn't vote for you.").

As with any abusive relationship, the victims cannot leave, because the combination of control of narrative, arbitrary application of rules, and the control of information create a vicious cycle of misperception and anger, where anyone who seeks to criticize the relationship or the abuser only further justifies the abuser's false narrative of persecution: "See, the media and Obama supporters say that I cannot win the nomination because by all empirical measures I cannot: They must really hate me and love Obama!" This feeds the bunker mentality of an abusive relationship, where the victim cannot leave, because the abuser has convinced him or her that he or she cannot trust anybody external to the relationship as they are only motivated by hatred for the specialness of what they have together, and further, that the victim would have no life worth living without the abuser.

It is this detachment from reality, the spectacle of seeing a small fraction of those 17 million voters (since it is only a small fraction who have been emotionally fragilized by the process) continue to be ensnared in Clinton's abusive manipulations, that has angered Obama supporters and generated the inflammatory rhetoric and counter-accusations that comes across online. Wat can we do to solve this?

First, as any advice columnist will tell you, validating Clinton in any way shape or form would be the worst possible reaction. That will only further perpetuate the adherence of her troubled victims to the "Clinton-BocaRaton Co-dependency syndrome" by legitimizing her delusions of grandeur and providing another false narrative to her supporters. But, then, so will our continued anger and incomprehension of how someone can survive by fueling so much hatred.

No, as most advice columnists will suggest and as clinicians will agree, we need to engage Clinton's victims in a slow, methodic phase of questioning the different principles upon which their relationship is founded. Ask pertinent questions. Provide them small snippets of information when you think they are ready. Allow them to hope for positive outcomes that might not be dependent on their relationship with Clinton. More than anything else, though, you must give them time. Time to cope. Time to heal.

But, be patient. Even if we start today, it may take up to five months.

Rachael Ray's scarf denied prestigious Fulbright grant... or First they came for my Venti Mochaccino

The path to cheap latte and a French Cruller is paved with virulent xenophobia. As my loyal readers know, I have used this space previously to voice my disgust with the shameless xenophobia of recent Dunkin' Donuts ads. At the time, I had been unaware of the flexible immigration policies practiced by Dunkin Donuts, nor had I visited the local Dunkin Donuts franchise which was run -- shockingly enough -- by a South Asian family (again taking jobs from merit-worthy Appalachian voters!).

I suppose, bowing to the pressure I had leveled on the D-squared breakfast juggernaut, they decided to show a more cosmopolitan face in their new ads -- and what could be more cosmopolitan than Rachael Ray, in a scarf!

However, some shrewd guardians of the American lifestyle, those who had lectured us on the slippery slope of introducing Fritalian into our coffee lexicon, noticed something menacingly awry in Rachael Ray's sartorial preferences (yeah, blame the stylist -- we're not listening!) in the new spot. What's next? -- they challenged us -- Would you like your global jihad in Deici or Venti?

Yes, they noticed that behind that innocent paisley pattern, lay the sweaty, swarthy hands of the Persian Puppetmaster:

"The pattern is still widely popular in Iran. It is woven using gold or silver threads on silk or other high quality textiles for gifts, for weddings and special occasions. In Iran its use goes beyond clothing - paintings, jewelry, frescoes, curtains, tablecloths, quilts, carpets, garden landscaping, and pottery also sport the buta design."

Some, though, have suggested that the black-and-white scarf pattern is not paisley at all, but rather... a Kaffiyeh...

This insidious piece of cloth, also known as the "Palestinian newsboy," as we all know, can mean anything from, "I am a Palestinian (or other Arab nationality) male" to "I am a naive and self-indulgent French teenager trying to figure out why I'm the only one of my friends who hasn't gotten laid yet." And so it was that, under pressure from alert US citizens who have led an admirable crusade against both French and Arabs alike over the past several years, Dunkin Donuts finally returned to its old ways of bashing on all things that appear foreign -- with the exception, of course, of its own latte.

Not content, however, to see Rachael Ray's accoutrement silenced, the US Department of State, amalgamating the black-and-white paisley patterned foulard with the Palestinian kaffiyeh, chose to deny the Fulbright Grant it had previously offered the scarf to complete graduate work in the United States. Although the State Department refused to shed light on any specific threat posed by the kaffiyeh-like item of apparel, they pointed to Israeli model Moran Atias' choice to exile all scarves from her own wardrobe as a model for their decision. While Ray's scarf has maintained its silence on this lost opportunity, an Israeli lawmaker has commented on the decision:

This could be interpreted as collective punishment[...] This policy is not in keeping with international standards or with the moral standards of Jews, who have been subjected to the deprivation of higher education in the past. Even in war, there are rules.

This is why, in addition to maintaining my call for a boycott of You Don't Mess with the Zohan for re-invigorating the "suspect Arab" discourse within American cinema, I would like to declare June 21 "A Day Without Scarves" as a reminder that by punishing scarves for the actions of a few extremists, we just end up punishing ourselves.

What upsets me most, though, about the dual decisions of the State Department and Dunkin' Donuts, however, is their crass violation of the golden rule: Fifty million Frenchmen can't be wrong!



Now, everybody knows, when it comes to hating Arabs, the French are in a whole other league! While, here in the U.S., we have been hating Arabs off-and-on for a maximum of maybe 60 years, the French have finely tuned Arab hatred over nearly 200 years. Seriously, these guys were interning and torturing Arabs long before your average American could begin confusing Guantanamo with Guantanamera!

So why is it that the kaffiyeh is as popular among French trendsetters and youths as Cheap Trick in Japan? Based on my own unscientific and informal field surveys, more French (of non-Arab origin) youths in the all important 18-24 demo wear kaffiyehs than Palestinians. But don't trust me, see for yourself:




This is a country that tells Arab women what they can wear to school, and yet the only subject for debate among the French over wearing the kaffiyeh is whether its current standing as a fashion accessory dilutes its powerful symbolism of solidarity with the Palestinian cause.

One can only come to the conclusion that wearing the kaffiyeh is 100% compatible with defeating Islamofascism! 'Nuff said.

Test for Clinton's Phemynsyt Voters

Just wondering how many of those ladies who cry "sexist" at every criticism of Hillary take their granddaughters to WNBA games.

Things I hate today (High School 'tude edition)

Anonymous... and anyone else who dares to use my comment section to accuse Bryan Adams of being a "Stupid Nerd!"

I don't mind repeating myself, but my readers might mind me repeating myself. Still, by provoking me on the subject of Maltese-Canadian Superstar Bryan Adams, you force me to repost the most utterly manly rock 'n' roll video ever made:




Anyone who plays with a knife and an apple while contemplating a sweet dame, just minutes before their eyes meet suggestively pretty much has staked out his claim on Planet Virile for eternity!

Wave that flag, Bryan. Wave it high!



The hollow concept of Stupid Nerds...

I use the term to indicate a person who acts "weird" in a nerdy way even though he isn't actually unusually smart or intellectual.

Thanks dumbass. In other words, a "Stupid Nerd" is anyone upon whom you looked down in high school, because he reminded you of yourself but got lower grades.

To momentarily join this quibble over definition, I would suggest that by definition, nerd does not actually imply intelligence... rather that a nerd is by definition, stupid, otherwise he or she would not have allowed him or herself to be boxed into the image of a nerd. I mean, isn't the whole point of Real Genius, the definitive work on this subject, that real geniuses don't act like nerds?


Further, the essence of being a nerd is narrow-minded devotion to studies and "book smarts" while in high school, thus describing much more a work ethic (vorwonklichheit) rather than natural talent or ability. This is harder to find nowadays, perhaps because of the excess pressure on kids to become "well-rounded" as part of the college admissions sweepstakes. In other words, yesterday's nerds are now today's humane society helper, food bank manager and liaison to the Wilmington-Huangzhou sister-city project.

Of course, since Somin and Taylor (I got more nauseous wading through Taylor's blog than I did when I saw the most recent Taco Bell commercial) could never quite extract their noses out of their yellowed copies of Atlas Shrugged while in high school, they appear to have missed out on the new philosophical wave that has transformed how we see our students today. It is sad, in fact, that they now find themselves having to revisit their traumatic experiences of high school in order to retroactively define an underclass that they have somehow managed to rise above today. In that sense, to still be talking about "jocks" and "nerds" reveals a certain atrophy, common among Objectivists, of all sense of social aptitude and whatever mysterious gland -- as Bill Richardson would say, "I'm not a scientist!" -- that allows the teenager to mature into adulthood.

Certainly, Multiple Intelligences theory is anathema to the ludicrous disciples of Rand, but, having taught high schoolers, it is a refreshing approach to understanding your students. Obviously, not everyone could be very bright, but almost without fail, those students who obtained the best grades were also popular and talented and often athletically capable. Those students who didn't do all that great were often wildly entertaining conversationalists, talented musicians or phenomenal athletes. While I was not much hung up on my disastrous high school years before teaching, the experience itself has reconciled me, at least in spirit, with many of the folks who I considered dreadful enemies and poseurs at the time.

The high school Objectivist attitude, however, as well as Murray and Co's crusade against Multiple Intelligences theory is founded on the belief that only one indicator of ability is valid, and that consists of some alchemic formula that combines SAT scores with GPA (Let's not enter the IQ debate here). Not only that, but also -- and this is the key to why Rand's disciples are so repugnant -- when this formula results in an equivalence among two people, the person for whom this score is the only thing going for him or her, gets the nod as the true genius, because it is by suffering persecution and marginalization that one truly demonstrates the promise of one's future achievement. The concept of "Nerd" which Somin and Taylor embrace is only valid, after all, as a revenge fantasy against people who have a lot more going for them. Hence, the rich asshole as the pinnacle of success in the "Stupid Nerd" world view.

Delving back into history, however, our friend John Galt is but an imperfect version of the Objectivist Uber-mensch. If Ayn Rand was so deeply in love with Mickey Spillaine it is because she realized, in the end, that Mike Hammer was the ultimate Ayn Rand hero. Which bodes ill for the "Nerds" of this world, because if Mike Hammer sees some sallow high court clerk in spats hanging on to a couple of extra bucks that he could've tipped Thelma at the breakfast buffet at Reeves, he's gonna pistol whip that little worm back into the '50s.




Ilya Somin
I mean, come on... Anybody can be the object of constant ridicule in high school, but it takes a certain degree of ineptitude to be a loser in college. Especially a college full of former high school "nerds"! I mean sure, I got my share of chocolate swirlies in college -- but that's just the natural order of things when you're sharing a bathroom with the rugby team. This kid, though -- its like he had to make up "over 200 footnotes" just to keep him company in his lair.
And the fact that he has clearly attained a degree of success in his chosen career path but still needs to fabricate "Stupid Nerds" to feel better about himself is pathetic.
If anyone out there knows Ilya now, please let me know if he still recites the list of his test scores and all the colleges, grad schools, etcetera that have admitted him upon your first meeting. Thanx!



Trust Fund Scumbags and...
the feelings of inadequacy generated by more successful bloggers reminding me how much younger they are...
I sometimes have the impression that there was a kind of massive savviness shift that came about in the five years after I left college, for which the propagation of the Internet is largely responsible. Whatever it is, I notice that there's a huge network of professional bloggers all in their mid-twenties who seem to just naturally be able to handle the vast amount of information made available by the Web, and who, of course, generally made the decision to take low-paying journalism jobs coming out of college to begin with.
My first regular access to the Internet began in 2000, and I sometimes wonder about the difference in attitude shaped by regular use of the Web in high school and in college.
If one values being read above all else, and, suddenly, the mode of access to readership radically changes only after one's most formative years, the result and required adaptation can overwhelm at times.
In light of this, one of the wonderful aspects of teaching high school is the ability to relive one's past bad decisions through one's students, and to detect in their lives -- and through one's investment in their development -- the great promise that the future holds.

To return to the bloggers themselves, though, this generation gap finally explains to me why there appears to be a consensus in the wonk community that Jay-Z is the greatest rapper of all time.



Lebron James
It has dawned on me over the course of the NBA Playoffs that Lebron James has become unbearable. First there was the whole "I'm Jay-Z, Deshawn's Soulja Boy" flap. Then there's the gripes about every foul, and the expectation that he should be getting a Jordan call every time the ball leaves his hands. Then, there's his ridiculous rip-off of KG's awesome chalk ritual at the start of every game to show that he's just another pumped superstar. Not to mention, of course, his noxious disrespect for his mother.

For one, this suggests that Lebron takes himself waaaaaaaaaaaay too seriously. (I'm sorry, but when you're blessed with Gilbert and his wackiness, Lebron's attitude just seems totally out of place.) But the greater problem I have, is that it seems that Lebron is the first NBA superstar with no authentic bone in his body.

You will tell me, "Wait a minute, that was Kobe "bruised ribs" Bryant!" But, the thing is, Kobe at least is transparent in his attempt to model his game entirely upon Jordan's.

Lebron, just seems to have taken every solemn, Waltonesque cliche about "what makes an NBA superstar" and applied it to himself in the third person. I think the moment when I realized this was when, after dishing to Deltone "Does my face have a third dimension?" West for the game winning three in Game 4 against the Wizards, Lebron went on in his post-game interview to talk about (to paraphrase) "This is really Delonte's moment. He should have a lot of confidence that I trusted him to make the shot." There was, in his bizarre elaboration on how Delonte should feel great that Lebron trusts him, the element of Lebron writing the media's story for it. It was as if, not sure whether the media would pick up on the specific, "Lebron makes his teammates better storyline" he felt the need to underscore the point.

In any case, this moment has stuck with me and now defines my view of Lebron.

Boycott the Zohan

You Don't Mess with the Zohan is a morally repugnant movie. I have always wondered how Jewish teens and tweens got away with wearing militaristic Zionist T-shirts to school. It seemed, growing up in American Jewry that part of our socialization passed through a ritual worship of the IDF and Mossad. The below is a copy of a T-shirt print from my sister's high school wardrobe.


This perception of a technically superior Israeli military and intelligence apparatus that can teach us Americans how to wipe out terrorism once and for all has only gained greater force in the aftermath of September 11th. This is despite many bungled and damaging covert operations over the last ten years and increasing reports of sinking troop morale.

Spielberg's Munich most recently broached the problem of the persisting mythos of the Israeli superspy, albeit in an awful, heavy-handed movie, whose only saving grace -- that it was filmed in beautiful Malta -- was undermined by the more appalling fact that Spielberg apparently forgot that there were Jewish actors in Hollywood who could have filled some of those roles.

So, it is all the more surprising that Adam Sandler would choose to coast in for his latest effort on this outdated tall tale of Israeli counter-terrorist perfection in the cuddly story of a former Mossad agent who retires to New York, only to find his services needed in the dismantlement of a home-grown terrorist threat led by some Arab taxi driver (presumption of plot based on trailer) and his pals. It is more sad though than surprising that we have come to simply accept in our culture that Zionist militarism is an invariable positive, and that any Arab national sentiment is suspect and, at best, a potential negative.

So, in addition to calling for a Zohan boycott, I would also like to propose the following idea for an Adam Sandler movie (Any resemblances to Happy Gilmore or Waterboy are purely coincidental) to Hollywood: Don't Tread on Ayyub!

Ayyub is a Palestinian who makes it to Washington, DC, where his patience developed through waiting at checkpoints becomes a valuable commodity for lobbyists. Soon, he becomes the most sought after line-stander on the Hill. However, one day while standing in line, he overhears word of a secret plot by the AYPAK lobby, representing the interest of wealthy Zinconians in the US, to kidnap the Secretary of State and replace her with an AYPAK clone. The only way to stop them is to join the K Street softball league, where the stone-throwing skills of his youth would allow him to take down the powerful plotters within AYPAK. But, can Ayyub save US foreign policy and still win the love of the charming Senate staffer whose boss is fiercely pro-Zinconian? Why not? After all, this is America!

Who hates Florida and Michigan voters NOW?!?

If Hillary really cared about Florida and Michigan voters, would she really announce her imminent delivery of "the greatest speech ever" opposite the extremely close fourth quarter of game five between Orlando and Detroit?

In any case, you gotta give it to Senator Clinton, her sound economic policy arguments clearly got through to the good, hard-working folk of West Virginia...

A Fighter to Fight for YOU and Never Quit to Fight to Win FOR YOU

Senator Clinton unveiled her new strategy today via a YouTube video and Press Release:

They see in Hillary Clinton a candidate who understands the pressures they face. As they watch her tough it out against all odds, refusing to quit and continuing to compete against whatever the media and her opponents throw her way, they see a woman as tough and resilient as they are. They clearly want her to win. Her victory, I believe, is their victory.

Some people may think all that is crap. But such people have obviously never worked a day in their stinkin' (ecru or darker) lives!!!!!!

And I used to respect Emily's List, too...

Break out the raki... I'm about to have a good cry

Meanwhile, the real victim, our foreign policy, and Obama's sterling vision thereof keeps sacrificing itself upon the altar of ludicrous campaign-induced litmus tests.

First, there was super-wonk and human rights community icon, Samantha Power...

Now, Algeria expert and brilliant analyst of the Peace Process, Rob Malley gets thrown overboard by Team Obama apparently due to having spoken with people in occupied Palestine.

It would be nice to, as usual, blame everything on the Jews and the extent to which the US Zionist lobby is the most asinine, self-in-foot-shooting organization that ever existed... but, for reasons that will be explained later, I am indefinitely forswearing any self-hating chic. But it just seems that there is some kind of establishment thinking in DC that requires that people who make foreign policy not talk to anybody who may be affected by our policies, and, more to the point, that they waste everybody's time engaging in blustery national security pissing matches.

Now, Samantha Power and Rob Malley are both pretty unique voices who seem to presage the awesome renewal in Obama's vision... this latest just reveals how painful the process changing the status quo can be. Having met RM, this feels -- of course -- even worse. The thrill of thinking that I was just one degree removed from Obama's foreign policy shop -- gone, baby, gone. Someone, get me some raki, stat!

... and I approved this message (Part 2)

Hillary Clinton just released this ad to persuade primary voters in Oregon:



Yes, People who love themselves love Hillary.

Isn't it fantastic that the only couple that may have gained more mileage through an orchestrated public relations effort to sustain the mythology of their victimhood is now out there campaigning for the Clintons?

Entitled, blessed with wealth, blonde, longstanding DC insiders, what don't they have? This just proves that the Natalie Holloway effect can also play out for the Washington press corps.

... and I approved this message

Hillary Clinton just released this ad, trying to persuade the superdelegates that she's more electable:



I hear that there's another one out there with Steelworkers instead of Firefighters, but I couldn't track it down. Still, same idea, I guess...

Now, can I just say something parenthetically for a moment?

(Okay, so when I see something like this, it makes me feel like a lot of people out there must hate me... ME personally -- okay, and probably also several of my close friends and acquaintances, not to mention former and future colleagues. It really hurts.)

Things I hate today

Grape nut flakes
Flakes
People who try to con--

What?

The Suns are on? Oh...
BRB

Things I think about while watching MSNBC

Rachel Maddow: "What does that say about Clinton's electability when her campaign's completely broke?" (or words to that effect...)
Damn straight!

Too much Pat Buchanan (he's a raving lunatic who's just blathering from his face) and not enough Eugene Robinson (Let him speak, goddammit Pat, let him speak -- at least he really does know what he's talking about!)...

Nothing new about Pez dispensers from Chris Matthews, but some other things he's saying don't make a lot of sense.



Oh... And David Gregory finally gets the Rocky analogy right!
It takes people 6 weeks to figure out the plot of a Sly Stallone movie? Maybe he is a genius!

Things I hate today

Pirates

Last week, it's French luxury yachts... Now, its Spanish tuna fishers (who, according to one commenter, are of course the "real pirates" -- which makes pirates just that much worse)... Whatever happened to the "Old School" pirates... Pirates these days are all "bitch" this... "ho" that... and I'm like, "Matey, do you kiss your scullery maid with that beard?"

old school pirate

Too much Ginger Ale and not enough Cel-Ray!
If people even overcame the idea "Celery Soda?" and tasted it, I am sure that the world (and designated drivers) would be drinking Cel-Ray and not Coca-Cola. Why doesn't the International Zionist Conspiracy stay on top of these things!



Too much Miley Cyrus and not enough Emily Osment! Hey Hannah, why not giving Lilly one of those both worlds that you're always bragging about!

Zack, for always shitting on Cody and leaving him holding the bag...

...unless I've got that the other way around.

Things I hate about This Week

Umm... How did it happen that the falsehood that if you raise capital gains taxes it lowers revenues gain common currency -- with absolutely NO examination in the media?

Umm... How convenient is it that -- post 21st debate outrage -- G-Steph gets to surround himself with the biggest softball, dumb-as-dirt panel: Sam & Cokie and G-Will? What about regular Katrina VandenHovel, who was deeply from her Nation podium? I mean, by skirting any real confrontation about their debate, how does ABC re-establish its bonafides?

By the way, remind me how such relentlessly stupid people are allowed to opine on television?

Umm... I have spent the last several weeks being appalled by Hillary Clinton. After listening to McCain today, I am super-appalled by McCain. The winning strategy for Obama, I think, is to challenge him sufficiently in debates on the issues about which McCain is clearly just blowing snot out of his ass... until McCain gets so pissed off that he scares away all voters -- or gets an aneurysm (whichever comes first).

By the way, Cokie is currently arguing for the continuation of "business as usual in Washington" on the grounds that she seems to believe Obama is proposing constitutional revisions that eliminate "checks and balances." Too bad that's already been done...

Patriotism = Death

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's resident-Robert-Novak interprets Obama's discourse on patriotism as "bribing veterans":

It is ultimately not about presidents and generals performing roles. It’s about the sons and daughters of America and of our national honor and ultimately, of course, about national security and the world our children will inherit.

Patriotism in a president is not about calling ordinary soldiers heroes. It is not about giving them things of material value. Nor is it about putting them on an exit plane while the people they betrayed watch in horror at the emptiness of our promises. It’s about making it possible for those who answered their country’s call to duty to look themselves in the mirror for the rest of their lives.

Yeah... under current circumstances, that's not a lot of time to look in that mirror.

Worst week ever

What is hell? My own personal definition has always somehow incorporated Chris Noth... whether it is spending an eternity in the same room with the man, or an eternity watching him on television in one of those Crime Scene Investigation shows.
I believe, though, that some more Christian-leaning folks may see hell as the opposite of, say, heaven; and some Christians accede to heaven by resisting temptation on earth. They stand to benefit, one assumes, by reaping a reward in the afterlife. In this case, wouldn't hell be a place of eternal temptation where everything in which you wished to indulge was laid out before you but... just... out... of... reach?

Well, that's kind of what this week is for me. In its infinite wisdom, the University of Georgia has somehow decided to make the multiple-final-project-inducing final week of spring semester coincide with all of the following:

• The start of the NBA Playoffs
• The return of Gossip Girl with new episodes

• Around-the-clock coverage of the Pennsylvania primary

• The opening in theaters of Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo