Morning Coffee (124)

It was a beautiful day today. At least it was for the 15 minutes I saw it during my drive to work. Now I sit in a building with no windows, in a cubicle with little ventilation, where the temperature is presently 76 degrees and rising. Anyway, I’m sure it’ll be lovely today. Go out and enjoy it if you can. Get some fresh air. Then rub it in.

Atreyu Stars in: The Never Ending Election:

In Morning Coffee 119, published on 26 Mar 08, I prophesized (sarcasm – it wasn’t a huge leap) that Clinton stood no chance of securing the nomination. Since none of my five readers will call me on my botched political assessments, I can do that sort of thing here at the MC. But anyway, it doesn’t look like Clinton did much to prove me wrong yesterday. As we all know (or don’t), North Carolina and Indiana held their primaries. As was expected, Obama won North Carolina rather handily, by 14 points (yesterday’s prediction was off by one point), and Clinton took Indiana rather narrowly. Nevertheless, Clinton vows to continue on. It’s like this: I wouldn’t be surprised if today she holds a press conference ceding the nomination to Obama, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if she’s running for the 2008 election in 2010. I’ll even shamefully admit that I’m rooting for the ole lass. I’m a sucker for the underdog (who’d have thought Clinton would be the underdog nine months ago?), but this also makes for an interesting experiment. Both candidates have made seemingly fatal missteps, and both seem to have recovered. For me, this offers remarkable insight into the human condition, both in looking at the candidates and the people who vote.

Don’t get me wrong though. My rooting for her is not saying I hope she’s the next President.

Tree Older than the Earth Found in Sweden:

Miraculously, a tree in Sweden was found to be roughly 9,550 years old, making it older than the Earth itself, which comes in at a comparably youthful 6,000+ years old. Creationists are understandably baffled. With a little “creativity”, this discovery is easily reconcilable though. Like all those ancient dinosaur fossils, God simply placed it here to test our faith. Or maybe the tree’s not REALLY 9,950 years old; God just made it appear to be that old through manipulation of the physics of carbon dating. Maybe this tree was grown in God’s private garden, and He teleported it hear soon after He created Earth. This tree could even be an embodiment of God. Maybe the tree is God. Perhaps the Earth grew from this tree. Or maybe the Earth really is four billion years old after all.

This tree is a remarkable find. Granted, this tree hasn’t been in its same bark and trunk for 9,550 years as one might think. Since it’s a spruce, it basically makes genetic copies of itself and has the ability to make new trunks to survive various stages of earthly inclement weather. Or at least that’s how I understand it. And because we can examine that fallen bark, we can determine the age of the tree via carbon dating rather than having to harm the current trunk. Regardless, this tree has been around in some manner or another since roughly 7,542 BCE; since the 8^th millennium BCE. The Ice Age had just ended. Agriculture had only recently (in relative terms) become practical in the Fertile Crescent. There were perhaps 5 million people on earth. Total. It predates the mythical Moses by 6,000 years. Think about how old that is. It’s unbelievably old. People were barely beginning to form permanent settlements. Humankind’s last known close relative, the homo floresiensis, had only become extinct about 2,500 years prior to the birth of this tree. Remarkable. I hope it lives another 9,500 years.

Word of the Day: Contrite (adj): 1. Deeply affected with grief and regret for having done wrong; penitent; as, "a contrite sinner." 2. Expressing or arising from contrition; as, "contrite words."

On This Day in History: The dome of the Hagia Sophia, in Constantinople, collapses (558 CE). Justinian I orders it rebuilt immediately. The tree in Sweden laughs at man’s feebleness; it is roughly 8,100 years old. Despite pulling an arrow from her own shoulder, Joan of Arc leads the final charge at the Siege of Orléans (1429). This is the turning point in the Hundred Years’ War, which is but a moment in time for our Swedish tree. The German submarine U-20 sinks the RMS Lusitania, killing 1,198 people (1915). Many formerly pro-German Americans turn against Germany and the US will soon enter WWI. The tree thinks that all man does is fight wars. Nikita Khrushchev announces that the Soviet Union is holding U-2 pilot Gary Powers (1960). The tomb of Herod the Great is discovered (2007).

“How old would you be if you didn’t know how old you were?” – Satchel Paige, baseball legend.

“By the time I have money to burn, my fire will have burnt out.” – Unknown.

Morning Coffee (123)

Greetings, Coffee Drinkers.

Singing Fat Lady Proclaims It to be Over for Roosting Chickens:

Yogi Berra once said, “It ain’t over till it’s over.” Someone else opined that, “It’s not over until the fat lady sings.” Others have made comments about chickens coming home to roost. Then, there’s the straw that broke the camel’s back. More still have asserted that it was the final nail in a particular coffin.

Well today, for Hillary Clinton, that fat lady might start singing, and it might be over. Clinton’s campaign has for weeks been fueled by the notion that she has more electability than does Barack Obama, and she has survived one contest at a time. But she has faced an uphill battle, against math and inevitability. She has had to win - and win big - every contest for quite some time now and today might be the real beginning of the end. North Carolina holds its primary today (an epoch from the first in this cycle) and Clinton is expected to lose by as much as 15 points. Of course, she might stay in until next Tuesday’s primary in West Virginia. It’s even possible, but even more unlikely after today’s probable loss, that she could win the Democratic nomination. Who really knows except god and Yogi Berra (and a few hundred “superdelegates”)? I’m no expert, so I won’t predict her demise. The woman seems to have more lives than a Hindu cat, and an indomitable will so you can’t really count her out. It’s admirable, frankly. I don’t necessarily agree with the manner with which she seeks power, nor do I agree with her politics, but it sure is admirable. Would she make a better President than either of the two men still running? I suppose the voters will (or will not) decide.

Primus Primary:

All this conveniently provides me with an opportunity to gripe about our antediluvian election process. I find it remarkably odd that the Reverend Wright fiasco might do nothing to shift the chances of Obama being the Democratic nominee. I am not, in this instance, passing any particular judgment on his relationship with Wright. Instead I am pointing out that many of the people who voted for Obama in months past might not have done so had they known as much about Wright as they do now. Unfortunately for them, their votes have been cast. One may say that it’s no different than someone regretting their vote for a President, but it is because Obama is not yet President. I.e. we have a chance to prevent him from being so.

Certainly, Obama’s relationship with his pastor impacts his electability. So the Democrats may field a candidate who stands little chance of defeating John McCain, and they can’t do anything about it because he has an insurmountable delegate lead because half the nation has already held their primaries at one point or another before Wright was a household name?

I’m not about superdelegates. I do not want a bunch of party officials selecting our choices in elected officials. To me, it smacks of an aristocracy. “We know better than you mere citizens, so we’ll select some people for you to vote for.” No thanks. But I’m also not about a primary season that stretches for across six months. Campaigning is one thing. Let the voters get to know the candidates. But the disparate voting times makes some votes more meaningful than others. It might make some voters wish their states held primaries later, as they find out that the messiah for change with whom they fell in deep love has held a very close relationship with a bigoted preacher for 20 years.

I say we have a good and long campaign season. Let all the wonks talk and talk about the politicians. Let all the politicians make mistakes and faux pas. Let all those wanna-be Presidents blow through the equivalent of several small nations’ GDPs in cash campaigning for two years, and then we’ll all have us a good old fashioned democratic vote on a predetermined date. Sounds like fun to me. More exciting even.

Operation Chaos:

Sounds ominous, doesn’t it? Like some mad experiment by some secret government agency to control the minds of bee farmers in order to sew the seeds of the New World Order. It’s not though. It’s Rush Limbaugh’s foray into screwing with the Democratic campaigns. I wrote about it a while ago, and asked you all what you thought of it. But I never got back to you. Most of the respondents to my query opined that it was in bad taste. I agree. I’m all about doing what you can to win, or to make it harder for your prospective opponents to win, but encouraging people to switch parties to vote in primaries is despicable. Sure, Republicans haven’t much to vote for in their primary, as McCain’s “the man.” But I do not like this trend. It’s meddling. If you want to switch parties because you’ve developed an ideological difference with that party’s ideology, fair enough. But to do so simply to undermine the opposition…must we make politics even dirtier?

Limbaugh’s a moron. I’ve never liked his self-important rambling. Check out the top of his webpage. See him in his disgustingness with his smug look and expensive suit and cigar. See that gold microphone, as if he’s telling us that he’s speaking to us through an instrument of the divine. I don’t agree with Al Franken on much, but I do agree with his basic assessment of Limbaugh’s character.

In other news, I’m a fan of a few fringe celebrities (authors) that you’ve possibly never heard of. Thomas Friedman is sort of one of them, but he’s more in the mainstream than say, Victor Davis Hanson. Anyway, Freidman is one of the most perceptive people writing today, I think. Read this article if you’ve the time. In it, he talks about some topics I mentioned yesterday.

Word of the Day: Amalgam (noun): 1. An alloy of mercury with another metal or metals; used especially (with silver) as a dental filling. 2. A mixture or compound of different things.

On This Day in History: Renaissance ends as Spanish and German troops sack Rome (1527). The Hindenburg, a German zeppelin, is destroyed when it catches fire near Lakehurst, New Jersey. “Oh the huge manatee.” John Paul II becomes the first pope to enter a mosque (2001). That’s hard to believe.

Morning Coffee (119)

I apologize for Brewing so little of late. There simply hasn’t been much time for the simple pleasures in life, like enjoying Coffee with friends. And being under no less of a time crunch today, let’s just dive in, shall we?

Being Hillary:

It is my assessment that Hillary Clinton now stands no chance of securing the Democratic nomination for President. Prior to the revelation this week that her recollection of her trip to Bosnia in 1996 was somewhat inaccurate, I thought that her chances of getting the nomination were pretty slim, but now there is simply no chance.

For those who aren’t aware, during a 17 March speech, Clinton said of her trip to Bosnia: "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base." This has been discredited by a number of sources, including the comedian Sinbad who, along with Sheryl Crow was with the then First Lady and Chelsea. The Senator’s version of events was dismembered in a way you rarely see with such a “polished” figure.

Yesterday Clinton was forced to admit she was in err, however, she claims she merely “misspoke.” She told the Philadelphia Daily News editorial board, “I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things - millions of words a day - so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement." Just a misstatement. No biggie. Sorry ‘bout that.

It may sound odd to those who are familiar with my impressive cynicism, but I don’t necessarily think that Clinton purposefully mischaracterized those events. It’s well possible that she is convinced that things happened that way, or some way similar. It was probably the first time she’d ever been in a remotely dangerous situation, and surely the first time she’d ever landed in a military aircraft in an area that could be hostile. I think the part of her account where she was asked to go into the armored portion of the cockpit was verified. If they asked her to do that, it’s reasonable to believe that it highly influenced her subconscious, and the hectic moving around she did, accompanied with the time zone difference and jet lag might have reinforced the hurried, panicky flurry of activity she witnessed on the military base that’s associated with any high-level visit. She might have gotten the wrong impression, and jumped to conclusions.

I’m not in any way apologizing for her behavior, or giving her a pass, because she could have been less careless. But I don’t think this is any worse, fundamentally, than Obama’s claim of total ignorance at Pastor Wright’s bigotry. Actually, while I find Clinton’s issue more insulting than Obama’s on a personal level (me having been in a combat-ish zone), I find it less of a disqualifier. Obama was, in my mind, completely disingenuous about a relationship spanning years with a man who he considers to be an uncle. Obama had to have known, somehow, that some of Wright’s sermons were as they were. I simply do not accept the excuse that he never heard Wright say anything. It’s absurd. He is lying. I don’t believe in guilt by association, necessarily, but the man lied. Clinton lied too, but her lies could be attributed to the typical problem with eye-witnesses: she remembered wrong because she was in a state of heightened stress. This doesn’t excuse it, but it doesn’t completely freak me out.

It is also possible that she misrepresented the truth for political gain, of course. But it seems like an obscenely rookie mistake by a campaign that is supposed to be so polished. This is why I am hesitant to believe that it was her attempting to gain more credibility in the national security realm (as if being shot by snipers is to gain instant credibility).

Having said that, the Obama campaign will not let it go, I’m sure. It will be an issue. And I think it simply adds to the animosity felt towards Clinton by the public, and rightly so.

I remember Clinton’s “sniper fire” story surfacing a while ago, but oddly, I haven’t seen any mention it’s surfacing prior to 17 March. Actually, Obama’s campaign was so kind to find several prior Clinton utterances of the event, as told in this article.

Pathetically, that’s all I have time for, and it was little more than rambling. It’s too bad, since there’s so much to talk about, like this, and this.

Word of the Day: Misnomer (noun): 1. The misnaming of a person in a legal instrument, as a complaint or indictment. 2. Any misnaming of a person or thing; also, a wrong or inapplicable name or designation. For example, it is a misnomer to call a politician a schmuck, when he’s actually a putz.

On This Day in History: Iwo Jima is declared secure by US forces, “ending” over a month of combat operations (1945). Despite this declaration, three thousand Japanese soldiers remained alive in the island’s maze of caves. Some committed suicide, others eventually surrendered. Two men, Yamakage Kufuku and Matsudo Linsoki, held out for six years, surrendering only in 1951. That is amazing. Ground is broken for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (1982). Today is also the alleged birthday of Zoroaster, who could have lived as far back as the 6^th century BCE.

“I need a new job.” – Anonymous.

Morning Coffee (115)

Greetings. In the interest of keeping this edition the MORNING Coffee, I’ll get right to it.

People Suspect Vote Worthless; People Right All Along:

A little boy named Florida wanted to hold his Halloween party earlier than the rest of his class, as did a little girl named Michigan. The rest of the class said that if they could not, and if they defied the class, well, then all the candy they got would be taken away and none of it would count in the Big Candy Challenge after the party date. Florida and Michigan went ahead and held their party earlier, but some attendees were disappointed in the selection of activities; what one would normally expect at a Halloween party wasn’t there. At Michigan’s party, there was only one activity to choose from because the organizers, in cahoots with the rest of the class, wouldn’t allow any other activities from which to choose. Nevertheless, the party went off fairly well, and the kids got their candy. But remember…the candy can’t count.

Sounds absurd doesn’t it? Well it is; it’s a parody of a very real situation. And this situation provides a wonderful example of why the whole primary/caucus system is broken. Worse, it’s stupid. Because the Democratic parties in Michigan and Florida wanted to hold their primaries earlier than Iowa, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) told them that their delegates would not count. Thus, peoples’ votes in those two states do not count. If party leaders are miffed, they can make your vote meaningless.

But now, the nomination for the Democratic candidate is a close race. So some people want the Michigan/Florida contests to count. There’s talk of a redo. Or a mail-in vote. Who knows. But some people still don’t want the delegates from those states to count, because they feel slighted that the party officials from those states would dare defy the mighty DNC.

Surely I needn’t point out to you why this whole situation is obscene. Americans are being denied the right to voice their opinions in the electoral cycle because of the hurt feelings of a bunch of party hacks. Imagine, Democrats, the people who “look out” for the little guy, the common man, the downtrodden, messing with your vote because they’re offended. Look at it this way, they’re just relieving you of the burden. How the hypocrites can sleep at night, I’ve no idea. But it’s worse than something as simple as hypocrisy. Because the votes from Michigan and Florida would largely benefit Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party is divided as to whether or not those votes should count. Obama supporters would rather they not, but they can’t just come out and say it. Hillary supporters want them to count, but they can’t come out and say why since she agreed to not campaign in those states along with Obama. So…the DNC goes back on its word, looks weak and inept, AND ends up giving support to Hillary...all in the spirit of Democracy.

Don’t get me wrong…the problem isn’t just one for Democrats…

A major problem I have with our present system of nominating candidates is that those states who vote later in the election cycle risk having their citizens’ votes count far less than those states who vote early. For example, Pennsylvania doesn’t hold their primary for another six weeks. The Republican nomination has already been sorted out, so Republicans in PA have no voice in selecting the Republican candidate. It’s surely possible that Clinton could withdraw by then (though highly unlikely in my opinion), thus Democrats in PA have no voice in selecting their candidate. How is this fair? The vote of citizens in Iowa and New Hampshire count far more than do the votes of citizens in Pennsylvania. Are people okay with this? I really do not care if Iowa is a microcosm of Middle America. That doesn’t mean anything to me. I want your vote to count as much as mine, and mine as much as a guy in Des Moines. It sounds like our political parties, of which there are only two viable ones, are saying to us, the citizenry, “all votes are equal, but some are more equal than others.” How Orwellian.

Ethics for Dummies:

Yesterday (Tuesday for the unemployed who lose track of such things) the House of Representatives voted to create an outside ethics office, which is part of Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) focus on ethics, etc, etc. This office, which will be called the Office of Congressional Ethics, will have the power to investigate ethical misconduct by Congressmen and women. It will not have the authority to do so in the Senate, however.

I’m actually torn over this; not in principle, but in practice. In principle, our Representatives and other government officials need some sort of sound ethical oversight, which in and of itself is extremely unfortunate. More on that later. But in practice, I’m afraid that Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) is right when he says, “It simply adds another layer of bureaucracy on top of an already broken system.” I’m not certain more bureaucracy, and thus more government, is the right solution. And are they telling us that this new system, in which the Speaker appoints three members and the Minority Leader appoints three members, cannot be corrupted? I’m not convinced.

The creation of this office gives me yet another opportunity to discuss term limits. As I mentioned, it is indeed unfortunate that our elected officials are in need of such stern ethical oversight. One would hope (naively) that these people, with whom we entrust great power, would exercise some restraint. But this isn’t the case. As the Elliot Spitzer controversy is once again illustrating, powerful people are frequently hypocrites and frequently believe that they are above the law. I suspect that the longer one serves in a position of power the greater the likelihood that they “cut corners” here and there. This behavior eventually snowballs into bigger ethical failings. I would be interested in seeing a comprehensive study done on this, which compares corruption and unethical behavior in junior representatives with that of senior representatives. An objective study would likely be impossible for a number of reasons, but were it possible I think that it would prove my theory. If it did, then all the more reasons to have term limits. In fact, from my perspective, the only reason not to have term limits is because of a general refusal to relinquish power. Indeed, their reasons would be that they have such a desire to serve that they will do so as long as they are elected. However, the old fashioned check on elected officials, the voter in the official’s district, is no longer that effective. One could, as I do, argue that it is distinctly ineffective. In 1998, 401 of 435 Congressmen of the House sought reelection and all but six were reelected. That is a 98% incumbent success rate for you math geeks. The linked article goes into detail about the “perks” of office for those seeking reelection. Fascinating stuff, really. And all the more reason to have term limits. Constituencies feel that they’re getting the best product, but the system is heavily skewed to favor products already on the market. There’s little chance for fresh ideas and proper turn over to permeate the system. Instead, we’re stuck with stagnation because the incumbent has ample opportunity to control the pace of the fight. Remember, the above figures are for the whole nation, not just a few districts. The incumbent-centric problem is endemic.

The linked article, in its last few paragraphs, argues that the incumbent problem isn’t such a big deal because there is a steady turn over which takes place over the course of several election cycles. I do not find this sufficient reason to allow unlimited terms. Turnover thus takes place at a glacial pace and does nothing to limit those who could be classified as “political animals”, those being supremely efficient at manipulating pubic opinion (and thus being reelected) and dodging ethical constraints.

There is no better argument for term limits other than the simple fact that term limits has such little support among elected officials. Do we not find that slightly curious; perhaps a little self-serving and at odds with the interests of the electorate?

Word of the Day: Coprophilia (noun): An obsessive interest in feces. Editor’s Note: We should amend this definition to include “political news.” Today’s WoD sponsored by a loyal reader. For only 25 euro, you too can sponsor a WoD entry.

On This Day in History: Coca-Cola is sold in bottles for the first time (1894). Moscow becomes the capital of Russia again (1918). St. Petersburg held that status for the previous 215 years. FDR first addresses the nation as President, which became his first Fireside Chat (1933). Scores of people born; a number died.

“It is not death that a man should fear, but he should fear never beginning to live.” – Marcus Aurelius.

Morning Coffee (114)

Good Morning. I have decided to enact a complete and total ban on snow, effective immediately, for the next seven months. No need to thank me now. Just enjoy the nice weather. But don’t forget your Morning Coffee.

On occasion, I relate to you little phrases that I find annoying. “Ate his/her lunch” is one such statement. This phrase is used in the follow situation. While discussing Candidate B’s response to a tactic used by Candidate A, a political pundit will say, “He ate her lunch”, meaning that B out-maneuvered A. I always get the image in my head that he sort of pushed her out of her seat and proceeded to devour her lunch while looking at her menacingly out of the corner of his eye. Is this the sort of image we want of our politicians? As ravenous madmen and women running around and eating everyone’s lunch?

Now pardon me while I eat some lunch…figuratively of course.

I’d Like an Ice Cold Glass of Estrogen Water, with a Lemon Wedge:

Ahh…don’t you love those inflammatory headlines? I’m practicing for a gig in tabloid journalism when I retire, so bear with me. Inflammatory or not, the news is that an Associated Press (AP) study has found pharmaceuticals in the drinking water of at least 41 million Americans. You name it, it’s in there: acetaminophen, antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers, sex hormones, anti-epileptics, asthma drugs, drugs for high cholesterol and heart problems. Sounds terrible. I’m no doctor or pharmacist, but when I read something like that, it sort of makes me stop and think for a minute.

Someone might reasonably as, “How did these drugs get into our water supplies?” Some might reasonably recall the days when companies regularly placed into rivers all sorts of chemical waste. This is nothing so nefarious. You put them there. So did your grandfather with a heart condition. You there on the Pill, you too. The fact is, we’ve all put them with a dangerous weapon called urine. You might not have ever thought about it; when you take prescription drugs, your body only absorbs some of it. The rest is passed in your waste. Into the toilet it goes, and then into sewage systems. Then treated it goes into the water table to make its way to rivers and lakes and then evaporates into the air. Then it is rained out into and onto other water systems. In this way, virtually no water is free of this sort of pollution. (Side note: I remember reading about the relatively massive amounts of cocaine in river water in northern Italy a few years ago. Same concept.)

I know what you’re thinking; that the water is treated and that will rid the water of these unwanted drugs. Not the case. Virtually no one tests for prescription drugs and the treatments/filters used do nothing to these drugs. It’s pretty much an invisible issue. Don’t worry though; think of it as a prophylactic like fluoride, but for the heart and mind…or whatever.

The next question is what sort of impact will this have on people and wildlife? No one really knows. It would be reasonable to assume that the impact would be minimal considering that the amounts of any one drug present in the water are so miniscule that it would not adversely affect a person. But remember, these drugs were specifically designed to interact with the human body in small amounts, as the companies that make them realize that a majority of the drug is not absorbed. So this might pose a problem. Problems could arise years later, after cumulative exposure. Or it could be that the tests are so powerful that they can detect drugs even though they would have no affect no humans. Even if this is the case, that these drugs would have no adverse affects whatsoever, it still doesn’t really sit well, does it? I frankly don’t enjoy the fact that I’m consuming trace amounts of your daughter’s epileptic medication. But then again, I’m consuming trace amounts of arsenic and all sorts of other naturally occurring things that are bad for me.

Never fear, though. Officials representing state and local agencies have insisted that their water meets all federal and state regulations regarding quality and safety. They’re not lying either, because there are no federal or state regulations that set guidelines for pharmaceutical pollution.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s really no one to blame (other than America’s love affair with prescription drugs). But we should study this little understood phenomenon so we can understand what impact it’s having on humans and the rest of the pyramid of life.

Oh Sweet Irony, How Do I Love Thee:

Let me count the ways…I told you of the now famous “Who do you want answering the White House phone at 3 AM” commercial a few days ago. Who would have guessed that the highly influential commercial used footage that was originally intended for a railroad advertisement and was shot 10 years ago? It did. Clinton’s campaign bought the footage from Getty Images.

It turns out that the star of that commercial is Casey Knowles, a 17 year old (soon to be 18) high school student in Washington State. Her brother saw the commercial on “The Daily Show” and her family blah blah blah…digital recorder…blah blah…erupted… Anyway, in a twist of fate, turns out that Casey positively loves Barack Obama. Maximizing her 15 minutes, she was interviewed on “Good Morning America Weekend Edition” (not good enough for prime time or even the weekday edition, I see – media bias against Obama perhaps?). In this interview, she says about the ad: “What I don’t like about the ad is its fear-mongering. I think it’s a cheap hit to take. I really prefer Obama’s message of looking forward to a bright future.” You know, I agree…it’s cheap to suggest, right or wrong, that your opponent may not have the necessary qualifications to, you know, protect the nation and stuff. Like, that’s totally cheap and fear-mongering and stuff. And I too, like, totally dig Obama’s message of hope and bright futures. So bright that I gotta, like, wear shades.

I needn’t tell you, dear readers, that I’m utilizing my favorite device: sarcasm. Surely, I admire Casey’s optimism, and respect her right to choose to support any candidate she wishes to, but in fairness, Casey is herself a neophyte when it comes to…virtually everything. I will concede that it’s an interesting twist of fate that the girl who stars in the commercial that likely won Clinton some states last week is an Obama supporter, but come on. What’s worse is that her mother Pam told The News Tribune of Tacoma that Casey attended an Obama rally in Seattle and that she “cried and trembled after shaking the candidate’s hand.” Seriously? She cried and trembled? It is at this time that I refer to Casey’s prior statement regarding “forward to a bright future” and point out that her support of Obama is not based on reason or logic but instead the whimsical giddiness of the Flock. No person, and especially no politician, should upon being met, elicit from you trembling and tears. Notable exceptions include Jesus (joy), the anti-Christ (fear), Genghis Khan (fear), Attila the Hun (fear), Stalin (fear), or the Ghost of Tom Joad (joy), or any sentient undead (fear) (sorry zombie lovers).

As I’m pressed for time…I’ve got more on the nausea inducing tanker contract, but I’ll have to get to it another day.

Word of the Day: Inchoate (adjective): 1. In an initial or early stage; just begun. 2. Imperfectly formed or formulated.

On This Day in History: Today is Johnny Appleseed Day. Celebrate accordingly.

“Look back over the past, with its changing empires that rose and fell, and you can foresee the future, too.” – Marcus Aurelius.

Morning Coffee (112)

Greetings Coffee Quaffers. Icy today, so watch your step. Never fear though, the Coffee’s hot and fresh, as always. Okay, sometimes it’s less than fresh, but it’s always hot. Despite running a wee bit late on occasion.

It’s 3 AM…:

Perhaps you’ve read about Clinton’s commercial in which the phone rings at three in the morning in the White House, while your darling children are asleep in their beds. Something bad is happening, and someone is calling the President. Who do you want answering that phone? The phone rings and rings; six times it rings. But the rings build tension; ringing phones build tension in a way that few things can. And by that sixth ring, you the viewer are desperate for someone to answer it. Who do you want answering that phone? Clinton thinks that you want her to. So she does. She does and she’s fully dressed with perfect make-up. Remember, this is three in the morning. No matter, she’s on top of things. We feel safer because she was prepared to answer that phone and get to work. Right?

Well that commercial, and others, seems to have worked. Clinton scored surprising victories in yesterday’s primaries, winning Ohio and maybe Texas. Texas is a strange state, as it holds both a caucus and a primary. Clinton won the Texas primary, but the initial reports have Obama winning the caucus.

Yesterday, I prophesized that Clinton would win Ohio but not Texas. I’m not genius; a lot of pundits thought the same based on poll numbers. Since I was just sort of guessing (based on some knowledge of Ohio), I was only slightly surprised that Clinton won in Texas. Had I actually spent time analyzing and had a vested interest in the outcome, I would have been more surprised.

So what does Clinton’s big win mean? Little other than she stopped Obama’s win streak. Newsweek reports that Clinton has virtually no shot of securing the nomination even if she were to win the next 16 contests in a row. The math is against her. Only time will tell.

In other news, Clinton has hinted that she might consider sharing the ticket with Obama. Obama’s said that consideration of a joint ticket is premature. That might be a tough ticket to beat for Republicans. At the same time, would Obama even want to do it? Being Clinton’s VP for four or eight years might sour the public’s opinion of him, and gone forever would his claim to being new and fresh.

Eight Questions is the Limit:

Much press has been made about the lack of tough questions and probing that journalists have subjected Obama to. That changed yesterday when a number of reporters in Texas started hammering him on a few things. He denied that one of his aides met with Canadian officials, and responded poorly to inquiries about his ties to former fundraiser Tony Rezko, who is presently on trail for corruption.

So comfortable is Obama in the presence of reporters that when he began his news conference he encouraged reporters to “dive in” saying that he had no preliminary statement. They did. And he didn’t handle it too well. About Rezko and the release of documents, he said, “These requests, I think, could just go on forever. At some point, what we need to try to do is respond to what’s pertinent.” Reporters continued until an aide stated that there would be one last question. Obama made for the exit, and uttered, “C’mon guys, I just answered, like, eight questions.”

Eight questions. That’s all he’s good for, apparently. Especially when it gets hot. Do you think that he’ll be able to summon the intestinal fortitude to answer more than eight questions when his administration runs head on into a crisis? I’m sorry, but once he’s elected, his time for flowery speeches will be minimal. It’ll be time to actually do things, and journalists will eventually get over their love affair with him and begin to ask hard questions. Seeing as though the President is answerable the People, he will be compelled to answer, because the questions will not stop. There will be far more than eight questions. Just ask President Bush.

I must point out my (and others’) favorite portion of the exchange. Regarding the meeting between an Obama aide and Canadian officials, which he denied having happened prior to the release of a memo proving that the incident did occur came out, Obama said, “That was the information I had at the time…” Interesting choice of words, considering President Bush and his administration have uttered much the same about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Republican Nomination Secured:

McCain is the Rebublican nominee. Anti-climactic considering the hoopla surrounding the Democratic campaign, I know. Still, it’s a remarkable turnaround for a man whose campaign last summer was nearly bankrupt and considered to be dead. Huckabee has bowed out of the running, which is unfortunate simply because his was the funniest of campaigns. What else can we say about this?

High on Mt. Sinai:

It’s possible that the roots of modern Judeo-Christian religion are the result of drug use. Benny Shannon, a researcher and professor of cognitive psychology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has suggested that Moses was under the influence of the bark from the acacia tree, which has psychedelic effects and is mentioned in the Bible.

Drug use in religious contexts is pretty common. Native Americans do it. As did early Muslims (hashashins for example), and probably a thousand other examples of which I’m unaware. Regrettably, Shannon’s study will be latched upon by all sorts of reprobate fools who will attempt to validate drug use or knock religion. To me, it’s merely another piece of the puzzle. Regardless of whether Moses’ drug use was real or even influenced his teachings, the fact remains that his monotheistic syllabus was propagated throughout the world. I should mention, for those who won’t read my source, that this is a theory, not a proven fact. But it’s still interesting. Chew on it…as you would the bark of the acacia tree if you so desire.

Word of the Day: Rhadamanthys (noun) (see rhadamanthine; adj): 1. A son of Zeus and Europa, rewarded for the justice he exemplified on earth by being made, after his death, a judge in the Underworld, where he served with his brother Minos and Aeacus. 2. An inflexibly just or severe judge.

On This Day in History: Emperor Julian moves from Antioch with a 90,000 man army to attack the Sassanid Empire (363). Julian would die as a result of this campaign. Julian’s goal was to check the growing might of a competitor and to retake lands lost by Constantius II. His troops performed admirably against the Sassanid armies, but were unable to take the capitol of Ctesiphon. Julian then decided to return to Roman borders, but his column was ambushed. He rushed into battle without wearing his armor, and was stabbed in the stomach with a spear. Julian was also known as “the Apostate” because of his desire to return the Empire to paganism, and he even attempted to rebuild the Temple of Jerusalem to foster religions other than Christianity. Because of this, it is possible (but unlikely) that one of his own soldiers, a Christian, killed him, a theory that was propagated by the early Church, which called the killer a saint. The Boston Massacre took place on this day; five Americans were killed by British troops (1770). The Nazis win 44% of the parliamentary election vote (1933).

“People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war or before an election.” – Otto von Bismarck.

Morning Coffee (111)

Here we are, in the year two thousand and eight. On the fourth of March even. It is rainy and dreary here. And there is thus no better time for some hot Morning Coffee.

It’s a big day, politically speaking; mostly for liberals, but potentially for everyone in our nation (and really the world). A number of states are holding their primaries today. Hillary Clinton has her back against a wall; she must win big today, or for all intents and purposes, she’s eliminated.

Conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh has done something many of his fans would never have thought that he would do: he’s encouraged people to vote for Clinton. No, this is not because he’s had a radical shift in his ideology. His reasons are as tactical as ever. No, he’s enjoying the “soap opera.” He wants Clinton in the race because he thinks she’d be easily brought down by the big game hunters that are the Republican Party. He’s actually encouraged conservatives to go out and vote for her, though he realizes it will be hard to stomach. I am not a fan of Rush Limbaugh, generally. I don’t think, as Al Franken does, that he’s a “big fat idiot”, but I don’t fawn over him, nor do I hang on his every word. I generally think he’s foolish; not stupid, but foolish. What do you think of his idea? I have an opinion, but I will keep it to myself for now. I’d like to hear my readers’ thoughts, free from the influence of the Brewer. What I will say, however, is if you live in a state that is holding a primary, go out and vote.

Read an interesting and funny article about the Mike Huckabee campaign trail. Check it out.

That’s all I’m saying about politics today.

Attack of the Killer Tornado:

A tornado in Mississippi ran through a National Guard barracks yesterday. The tornado redeployed the National Guard unit in a phased manner in about 6 seconds.

Eat Whale, Save Planet:

A group in Norway has put out a study that states that consuming whale meat is less environmentally damaging than consuming beef, pork, or chicken, based on fuel consumption of whaling vessels. Greenpeace then refuted that claim stating that, “almost every kind of food was more climate friendly than meat.” Really. Almost every kind of food? How many different kinds of food are there? Are there kinds of food that are more damaging to the climate than meat? I was pretty sure that there were basically two kinds of food: plant and animal (although in fairness, fungi and seaweed are technically not considered as being a part of the plant category). Anyway, they’re both wrong, in my estimation. While Norwegian group seems to try to justify their consumption of whales (which is fine by me), they also seem to imply that maybe we should all just eat whale. That’s not a good idea, since the whale population would be annihilated by the ravenous masses in a few years. Sure, it’s less damaging to the environment because the whales eat plankton and such rather than things we have to grow, but it’s not exactly sustainable. And Greenpeace is wrong because, well, their statement is just dumb. Besides, Soylent Green is drastically more damaging than even meat.

If anyone’s a fan, Jeff Healey, the singer/guitarist who was blinded as a child, and who sang the hit ‘Angel Eyes’ passed away on 02 March. He was 41, and had battled cancer throughout his whole life.

Coffee’s a little weak today. Since it’s free, you’ve no recourse.

Word of the Day: Probity (noun): Complete and confirmed integrity; uprightness.

On This Day in History: Hernan Cortes arrives in Mexico in search of the Aztecs and their abundant gold (1519). This ended poorly for the natives; the Aztecs were pretty much done for by late 1521, thanks largely to small pox, which they’d never encountered before and thus had no immunity to. Samuel Cole opens the first tavern in Boston (1634). The first US Congress met in NYC, putting the US Constitution into effect (1789). Wikipedia states that the first ever peaceful transfer of power between elected leaders in modern times took place in 1797 when John Adams was sworn in as President, succeeding George Washington. I’d have to look into this more to buy it. Today used to be Inauguration Day (1789-1933).

“Most of the change we think we see in life is due to truths being in and out of favor.” – Robert Frost.

Morning Coffee (110)

Weekend Coffee is as good as any Coffee, don’t you agree? There’s so much to talk about. So, shall we begin?

Gone, Baby, Gone:

This coming Wednesday, the day after voting in several so-called big states, it’s very likely that Hillary Clinton will no longer be a candidate for the Democratic nomination. Thus, our choices for President of the United States will have been whittled down to two from what seemed like hundreds just five months ago. The grind is, well, grinding down.

But it’s not over. Obama is spending plenty of his massive treasure chest with the intent of eliminating Clinton on Tuesday. According to the New York Times, he has outspent Clinton two to one in television advertising in two states. This massive spending, which he can easily afford considering he raised $50 million in February (versus Clinton’s $35 million), has helped him virtually erase the two-digit lead Clinton held in the polls a few weeks ago.

The money advantage cannot be discounted, as unfortunate as that may be. Obama is able to fly hundreds of paid organizers to wherever they’re needed. He can dominate the airwaves with his message. I’ve heard his radio ads dozens of times on one radio station. I have never heard a Clinton ad on that or any other station. I have seen one Clinton ad on TV, whereas I’ve seen at least five for Obama. Admittedly, I do not watch much TV, so I’m sure the saturation is higher. Obama is going to spend Clinton into the ground. Already, his operation has expanded into states that will hold Primaries after Tuesday. Clinton is unable to do this. She simply hasn’t the funds.

It gets worse for Clinton. While she rolls out former Democratic Representative Dick Gephardt as a supporter, Obama ups the ante and has the indie band Arcade Fire perform for him. I have news for her. Young voters do not identify with a former Congressman that most of them haven’t even heard of.

It is possible that Clinton will pull off a few wins (some call this a miracle) on Tuesday, but this would serve merely to prolong the inevitable. She may not be as mathematically eliminated as Mike Huckabee (who?), but she is most certainly philosophically eliminated. As Clinton herself knows, Hope trumps Reality; as it did for her husband, it does for Barack Obama.

So the voters will believe in a change as much as something like change can be believed in, and Obama will secure the nomination, eventually. And here’s where our system gets less interesting. Two candidates will duke it out. The policies of each will become less radical as they try to garner votes and approval from voters in the other party. While there will be plenty of fire and brimstone during debates and the like while each candidate tries to stand out, the whole affair will really be sort of watered down.

Actually scratch that. Some aspects will be vaguely interesting. For example, what will happen with McCain’s finances? McCain made some tactical decisions about money earlier in this election cycle, and it might bite him, what with various rules and such. I am not going to go into specifics at present, as there will be ample time to discuss it, but what is interesting is that the FEC doesn’t have enough members for a quorum. Thus the FEC can’t make a decision. This will not change either. Appointees to the FEC have to be confirmed by the Senate, which is presently in Democrat hands. It’s not going to happen. In this, McCain’s campaign could face considerable financial difficulties, which, if things go a certain way, Obama will not have to deal with.

Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce the 44^th President of the United States, Barack Obama! Enjoy it America. You wanted it; you’ve got it.

Russian Politics:

Since I can’t seem to bore you enough with American politics, I’ll regale you with tales of intrigue from Russia. Arguably, Russian politics are more interesting than those in America, if decidedly more predictable. You might wonder why. It’s simple: the filth of Russian politics makes American politics look as though the Bald Head of Mr. Clean rules over the Election Cycle with an Iron Mop.

Let me put it to you this way. Russia’s Presidential election is today. Russia’s next President was decided in December. Does that make sense? Dmitry Medvedev, Former Chief of Staff for Vladimir Putin, former First Deputy Prime Minister, and current Vice Premier or Russia (and Chairman of Russian petro-giant Gazprom’s board) was unofficially endorsed by Putin on 10 December, and officially endorsed on 17 December 2007. Polls indicate that 79% of Russians will vote for Medvedev. Not bad for a man who has never held elected office. Putin spoke, and Russians will listen. The American media must be green with envy over that sort of influence.

How fun are elections in Russia? Your boss will tell you who to vote for. If you don’t vote, you’ll lose your job. He’ll even accompany you to the polls to make sure you cast your ballot in a responsible manner. Four hundred and fifty-thousand troops and police were deployed to make sure voting took place in a calm manner. Surely, they will not serve as an unconscious reminder to wayward voters.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the next President of the Russian Federation, Dmitry Medvedev! We at the Morning Coffee apologize to Russians everywhere for that little Constitutional prohibition that forbade Putin from seeking another term, but he’ll likely be your Prime Minister, so worry not for Comrade, er, Mr. Putin.

What is almost scarier than Russian politics, however, is the American media’s lack of coverage of those politics. Considering it is Russia (and really cold and dreary) and that there are almost no foreign observers watching the election, that’s not surprising. But let’s remember, this is not an insignificant country in Africa. This is Russia, a nation in possession of strategic (nuclear) weapons and the ability to deploy those weapons right to your front porch.

The uninformed says, “But Russia’s military is falling apart, we needn’t worry about them.” Five years ago this statement would have been largely true; Russia’s military was sustaining itself by selling equipment to any and everyone. It is hardly the case now. Russia has the largest proven natural gas reserves and the eighth largest proven oil reserves. Russia is rich. And that money is being spent on its military again. Russian BEAR bombers are regularly patrolling the skies near the US and its allies, even flying a mere 2,000 feet directly above a US aircraft carrier. The Russian military is making a comeback, and will only continue to flex its muscles. I contest that this is a good thing, as it provides a potential counterbalance to the growing Chinese might. But it also means that the US needs to treat Russia as if it belongs at the Big-Boy-Table. The US has been dismissing Russia for a long time now, and Russians resent it. This cannot continue. Criticize the lack of transparency (or in this case abundant transparency) in elections all you want, but believing Russia is as inept as it was in 1996 is a mistake.

Competition Bad, Cronyism Good:

For the past few years, the need of a new aerial refueling platform to replace the current, outdated KC-135s has dominated discussion in the US Air Force. A version of Boeing’s 767 was supposed to replace the KC-135, but Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld cancelled the KC-767 program in January 2006 following the revelation of corruption in how the contract was awarded. The following year, the Air Force announced the KC-X program, which pitted Boeing against the Northrop Grumman/EADS group. Both competitors offered a refueler based on an existing platform.

Stunningly, Northrop Grumman/EADS won the contract, which would produce the newly named KC-45. This has set off a storm of anger in Washington. See, NG/EADS is partly European, EADS being the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company, part of a conglomerate that builds the Airbus A-380, and a number of military aircraft. And the KC-45, which is built upon the A-330 platform, would benefit the French. We all know how well like the French are in Republican Land.

Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) said, “I’ll be calling upon the Secretary of Defense for a full debriefing and expect there will be a protest of the award by Boeing.” Senator Todd Tiahrt (R-SD) said, “We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers. I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."

Brownback and Tiahrt should be educated about the merits of competition, that being that it’s a pretty good thing. See, by all accounts, the A-330 platform makes for a better KC-45 than does the 767 presented by Boeing, being able to hold a great deal more fuel, cargo, and men, should that be needed. I don’t see the problem with this. The US Air Force is getting a superior product. Apologies to Boeing, but maybe next time they’ll do better and not have to whine about fair competition.

A bane to Tiahrt’s argument, Airbus has already stated that the company would assemble the tankers in Alabama, and promised to transfer the assembly of the A-330 there as well. That does this thing called, “Create American Jobs.” What’s worse is that not only has this vow been made, but Northrop Grumman/EADS is contractually obligated to build a $600 million assembly plant in the US, likely in Mobile, AL. Thus, we put to death Tiahrt’s complaint. The heart of the matter is that he’s from Kansas, and Boeing would have built the 767-based tanker in Kansas. Oh, I almost forgot to mention that he used to work for Boeing drawing up government contracts. Go figure.

Word of the Day: Garrulous (adjective): 1. Talking much, especially about commonplace or trivial things; talkative. 2. Wordy. Garrulous was the Senator from Kansas, as he bloviated needlessly about the loss of American jobs.

On This Day in History: Since I missed yesterday, indulge me…

01 March: The Continental Congress adopts the Articles of Confederation (1781). The first US Census is authorized (1790). Napoleon returns to France from banishment on Elba (1815). President Tyler signs a bill authorizing the US annexation of the Republic of Texas (1845). The Ethiopian army defeats an outnumbered Italian force in the Battle of Adowa, and Caesar rolls over in his grave (1896). Henri Becquerel discovers radioactivity (1896). Josef Stalin suffers a stroke, dying four days later (1953). Puerto Rican nationalists attack the US Capitol Building, injuring five Representatives (1954). A bomb, planted by the Weather Underground, explodes in a bathroom in the US Capitol Building (1971).

See last year’s Morning Coffee (64) for all the cool Roman happenings on this date.

02 March: Tsar Alexander II emancipates the Russian serfs (1861). His generosity is thanked by assassins in 1881. Note to self: Do not emancipate anyone; it bodes poorly for the emancipator (see Lincoln). Tsar Nicholas II abdicates in favor of his brother (1917). Nicholas and his little tribe are also killed. Michael is smart and defers acceptance of the throne, but is murdered in 1918. The first Communist International meeting (1919).

“The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of functions performed by private citizens.”

“The surface of American society is covered with a layer of democratic paint, but from time to time one can see the old aristocratic colours breaking through.”

- Alexis de Tocqueville.

Morning Coffee (107)

Gutentag. How about that weather, eh? Come on, that’s a stupid intro. I have a readership spanning the globe (seriously); remarking about the terrible weather conditions at my location is somewhat pointless. But anyway, how about that weather?

First, the important stuff: J-Lo has given birth to twins. Congrats. Marc Anthony is the father. No, not the Marc Antony that was Caesar’s friend as that would be a silly proposition. Instead, it’s the crappy singer Marc Anthony. I can’t imagine Marcus Antonius being exceptionally thrilled that his name has been corrupted by a man who sings “I need to know.” No, he’d run him through.

Kosovo Update:

Things appear to be heating up in Kosovo, which declared its independence from Serbia on 17 Feb. UN police were attacked by ethnic Serbs in northern Kosovo and protesters broke into the US Embassy in Belgrade and set a fire in the building which apparently killed one person, who turned out to be a protester who must have forgot to leave the building. Initial reports indicate that two floors of the Embassy were burned. Reports also suggest that the embassies of Croatia, Turkey, and the UK were attacked. No Americans were injured. The Serbian government, and obviously its citizens, are steadfastly refusing to recognize Kosovo’s independence and are trying to annul the decision to break away.

According to CNN, Russia’s ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin has stated that Russia “has not ruled out the use of force to resolve the dispute over territory if NATO forces breach the terms of their UN mandate.” Russia’s Foreign Ministry also stated that Kosovo’s declaration would be a negative impact. Mikhail Kamynin, spokesman for the Foreign Ministry said, “What happened in Belgrade yesterday is regrettable. But we would want to draw your attention to the fact that the forces that supported the unilateral recognition of Kosovo’s sovereignty should have realized the effects of the move.”

Contrasting this, NATO Secretary-General Jap de Hoop Scheffer said that KFOR (the NATO led 15,000 member peacekeeping force) would “respond swiftly and firmly against anyone who might resort to violence in Kosovo.”

Things could get interesting there in the next few weeks. Sixteen nations have thus far recognized Kosovo (including Taiwan, which really irked China, who for obvious reasons, won’t recognize a break away republic). It’s nice to see Kosovars celebrating their newfound freedom, but it could get ugly. Think about it. Would we want to see a portion of our country up and declare independence? A section did once, and we fought a horrifically bloody war over it.

Democratic Debate:

Last night. Be there, or be square. I was square. I had every intention of watching it, but forgot until about 3 minutes after it was supposed to be over. Considering it kept going for another 20 minutes or so, I did get to catch the end. I really just wished they would both shut up; it’s obvious they love to hear themselves talk. Despite missing the whole thing, I caught the highlight reel presented by Anderson Cooper afterwards, which was probably better than having to sit through all the boring parts, of which I am sure there were plenty. I can’t really comment on who I thought won, since I didn’t observe much. But I thought Hillary had a couple of good zingers. The commentators thought they were in poor choice, but I disagreed. On the plagiarizing issue, Clinton said that if Obama is going to put such an emphasis on words, then they should at least be his own. Good point. Even if he borrowed them with permission, I think maybe he should present his own material, since I’m supposed to believe so deeply in his message of change. Clinton then said, “That’s not change we can believe in, that’s change you can Xerox.” Loved it. Apparently, it got booed though, so I’m clearly in the minority.

The Race to the Republican Nomination:

It seems that the Republican nomination has been secured, hasn’t it? But it hasn’t officially. Huckabee is still in the race. Well, “in” is a loosely used word in this case. He’s not in so much as he just hasn’t abandoned his campaign. He has abandoned the strategy of winning states and securing the nomination outright. His new strategy consists of holding out and pushing the nomination to the Republican National Convention. In his “brokered convention strategy” he desires a deadlocked convention in which he will be seen as the most conservative alternative and then secure the nomination as delegates threw their support behind him. I’m all for a man doing what he thinks he needs to do, but this seems a little childish. Not only that, but it could very well fracture the Republican Party as this drags out into September (dragging this out means more attack ads, which mean more negativity, which does the Dems work for them). A fractured Republican Party means that the Democrats might have an easier time in the general elections, which isn’t good for Democracy as a whole.

However, I’m torn. I’m torn because it’s sad to me to think that the Republican primaries in Texas and Ohio really mean little since the Republican nomination is all but secured. Huckabee’s strategy at least gives some influence to these late-season primaries and caucuses. What this does, however, is illustrate the need to revamp our election processes. Or it should. But it won’t.

Huckabee also said that there should be more debates with McCain. I agree. Why not? More debates means I get to see more of the eventual nominee in each party. That can never be a bad thing. Ever. The more face time these people get, the better sense we get of their ability to lead, act under pressure, what their policies are, etc. I like the idea of more debates. Period.

Huckabee then lost me when he compared “the drive that keeps him going to the dream that the defenders of the Alamo fought for in 1836.” So, for Huckabee, Texas independence and the right to own slaves is why he’s continuing his run for the Presidency? He then said something only an ideologue says: “You don’t engage in battles only because you anticipate you’re going to win them. You engage in your battles because you believe that they’re right.” I suppose that idea appropriate when discussing the Alamo, but comparing a campaign to a battle in which all of the defenders fought to the literal death is pretty crass. Huckabee, if he loses, will simply go back to the comfortable life he had before running.

That’s all we have time for today, unfortunately. The day started late, and is ending early. Enjoy your weekend.

Word of the Day: Dissolute: (adjective): Loose in morals and conduct; marked by indulgence in sensual pleasures or vices.

On This Day in History: Galileo’s Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems is published (1632). The Republican Party opens its first national meeting in Pittsburgh, PA (1856). The Serbian Kingdom is refounded (1882). In Lake Placid, New York, the US hockey team defeats the Soviet Union hockey team 4-3 in the Miracle on Ice, considered to be one of the greatest upsets in sports history (1980). It should be mentioned that this game was not celebrated in the Soviet Union, though the individual Soviet players were sportsmanlike. While the game was televised in the USSR, it was played at 0100 Moscow time. Communist Party officials were thus able to limit the news of the embarrassing defeat. Pravda didn’t even carry a game report or mention at all.

And last but not least, on this day seven years ago, a good friend of mine rose from the dead. Thanks for sticking around, Brother.

“…Eleven seconds, you’ve got ten seconds, the countdown going on right now! Morrow, up to Silk…five seconds lift in the game…Do you believe in miracles?! YES!!” – Sportscaster Al Michaels, as the crowd counts down in the Miracle on Ice. I get chills just typing it.

Morning Coffee (105)

I woke up this morning to about 4 inches of light, fluffy white stuff on my truck. No, a Cessna filled with Colombian cocaine did not explode over my house. It was snow. And it was coming down. Of course, the city hadn’t yet bothered to mobilize the legions of snow plows, so the drive into work was like being a lone merchant vessel in the North Atlantic circa 1940; just waiting to take one to the keel. It never happened though, thankfully.

Delusional Change Someone Else Can Believe In (Revisited):

Talk about beating a dead horse. I was fortunate enough to hear the Obama commercial again this morning. The cute-girl-sounding announcer nearly has me convinced to vote for Obama on primary day. “Obama has a way of brining people together.” How? Where’s the proof? Give me an example. Alas, they do not. She says, as to why one might vote for Obama, “Maybe you want to end this war.” Then some teenager kid says to me, as if to illustrate the burning desire of all young people to end this “illegal, immoral war,” “Obama was against the Iraq War from the beginning.” Great. Wow. Can you put that into context for me? For what reasons was he against the war? Was he against it for being against its sake? Would he support any war? In what ways would war be a valid option for Mr. Obama? I have a lot of questions for the freshman Senator from Illinois on foreign policy and war. None have ever been answered. (Of course us proles don’t get sit downs with Presidential candidates, even the ones who have a way of bringing people together.) Then Obama comes on, and I’m reminded of a portion of his ad that I forgot about yesterday. He says, in closing out his ad, “Believe in the dream we call America!” America’s a dream? Nobody told me! I’ve been living in a dream world my whole life and just now I find out about it. What’s worse, I’m told to believe in this “dream” in the same breath. Must America be merely a dream? Can it not be something far more substantive? I’m clearly being facetious here, but I hope you get my point. Flowery rhetoric is Obama’s forte. But what substance does he have? Is he any more substantive than the dreams of which he speaks? Obama wrote a book called, “Dreams from My Father.” Dreams is a prevailing theme in his speeches and one might think that dreams make up his entire political persona. No substance, just dreams. Dreams might make us feel good, but the do not solve or assuage reality. Sure, I like a forward thinker as much as the next man, but a man who dreams and doesn’t do…is that who we want as President? Flowery rhetoric and feel-goodery is just that.

Obama’s wife, Michelle, is apparently proud of her country for the first time in her adult life. Go ahead, read it if you want. Barack’s excuse for her is…lacking. Hers was a poor choice of words.

McCain’s 100 Years War:

I don’t even want to talk about this whole thing, because it’s stupid. Obama’s campaign has unleashed the rhetoric-monsters on a fairly old McCain bit in which McCain made mention that it doesn’t matter how long we’re in Iraq so long as we succeed and we aren’t suffering casualties; even 100 years if necessary. I’ll be the first to admit that McCain’s phraseology was stupid. First of all, if we are, as McCain states, to “maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world,” we’d be suffering casualties, probably right up until the time we left. They may be minor, but we’d still lose men and women over there. I do see his point, that being that a secure Iraq is an important goal, and a set timeline is not something that is necessarily conducive to success. But the statement was dumb. And the Democrats seized on it. Now all you read about from the spokesmen of their campaigns is how McCain wants more than 100 years in Iraq, no matter what the topic is. He doesn’t “want” 100 or more years in Iraq. And they should remember, as McCain pointed out, that we’ve been in South Korea and Japan and Germany for quite a long time. There is an overwhelming precedent for long-term deployments of US troops overseas. What annoys me so is the misleading characterization that these political campaigns make on a daily basis, and on virtually every issue (tax cuts, anyone?).

Here’s the deal. McCain wants there to be a secure, stable Iraq, no matter the timeline. Success is the measure of success. Clinton wants the measure of success to be the withdrawal of all troops within 60 days of her election to the office of the President, no matter what that might mean for Iraq or the region. Obama would like to enact a “phased-redeployment” wherein all US forces are removed from Iraq by 31 March 2008. Getting involved in Iraq may have been a poor choice, but now that we’re there, we should make every effort to finish the job. I’ve written a great deal on the reasons for doing so, as some of you might remember. Not only are the pragmatic reasons, such as Iraq being secure from outside forces (Iran), important, but the more esoteric reasons like how we are perceived by the rest of the Muslim world are important as well. I’ve contended that leaving Iraq to its own fate after having annihilated its army, economy, and infrastructure and sewn the seeds of ethnic and religious violence is a terrible idea. A terrible one. If leaving Afghanistan to its own devices in 1991 was a bad idea that netted us 9/11, imagine how Iraq might turn out for us.

Cancer, Bacteria, Whatever:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his friends get their blights confused. Last week, one of his lackeys described Israel as a cancerous growth. Today, Mahmoud has described it as bacteria. Not just any bacteria, but filthy bacteria. He says, “The world powers established this filthy bacteria, the Zionist regime, which is lashing out at the nations in the region like a wild beast.” I love propaganda. Such beautiful prose. Like a wild beast. Lashing out. Filthy bacteria. As humorous as his bloviating sounds, we should remember that most people attempt to eradicate such things as cancer and filthy bacteria. Hell, one of the chief methods of eliminating cancer is radiation. You know where you get radiation? Enriched uranium. Know what you can do with uranium? Make nukes. Nukes kill cancer. I’m unaware as to whether or not the Iranian regime is working on antibiotic-tipped missiles, but they may be doing just that. If so, we know what their intentions are, don’t we?

Ahmadinejad later says that Israel “uses terror as a threat every day, and afterwards is happy and joyful.” This in response to the actions against the pink mist that was Hezbollah chief Imad Moughniyeh. Iran doesn’t do terror. Nope. No way. Not on your life. Unless of course you consider a little thing like bankrolling Hezbollah as, I don’t know, supporting terror every day. Or kidnapping British Marines right off the Persian Gulf. Twice. Nah, Iran does not support or condone any form of terrorism. And if I get cancer, I know where I’m going: Bushehr.

Castro Steps Down:

After nearly 50 years of rule, Fidel Castro has stepped down as the President of Cuba. Castro had been in power since 1959. I haven’t really anything remarkable to add to this event, as it doesn’t appear that much will change in Cuba right away. Castro’s brother Raul will take over. There’s hope, as Raul has indicated that things need to change in Cuba, but I doubt much will happen while Fidel is still alive. Anyway, I just figured I’d mention it if some of you only get your news from the MC (which would be a bad thing).

A hearty Happy Birthday to our US Postal Service, which celebrates its 215th birthday today. The Postal Service Act was signed by George Washington in 1792. Let’s test your unofficial motto and see if I get my mail today.

Word of the Day: Ersatz (adjective): Being a substitute or imitation, usually an inferior one. We are presented with ersatz Presidential candidates.

On This Day in History: Congress proposes the Twenty-First Amendment, which will end Prohibition (1933). Good idea Congress. Movie studio executives agree to allow the Office of War Information to censor movies (1943). John Glenn becomes the first American to orbit the earth (1962). Marilisa Xenogiannakopoulou, a Greek politician, and current record holder for the person with the longest name to receive an MC mention was born (1963). Kurt Cobain was born (1967).

“It is possible to provide security against other ills, but as far as death is concerned, we men live in a city without walls.” – Epicurus.