I give up. Part II.

Well, I guess that last post was invalidated by an outbreak of common sense by the US Senate. They voted to end debate and push for a vote tomorrow on Alito's confirmation and cloture was achieved, largely on party lines. So, the Democratic Base is appeased, Kerry and company come out looking like brave warriors defending whatever it is the far left cares about this week and it looks like Alito will be confirmed.

News hasn't broken on Kos yet. Their reaction should be well, suitably foamy.

Oh, there's a push to get Cindy Sheehan to run for Senate in California. If I were Dianne Feinstein, I might be worried. But of course, if Feinstein kicks her ass, that might send a signal to the far left that people who might be inclined to vote Democratic in California may be willing to go left- but not that far left.

That's all from the homefront for now. Thoughts on the State of the Union later in the week. Also, I think more on Hamas and their win, the state of the Liberal Democrats in the UK (my peeps!) and upcoming elections that interest me. (Costa Rica is next up for Latin America. Don't think that'll be too earth-shaking, apart from the potential confirmation that everyone south o'the border is turning left. Next big one, I think, is Peru. Then Colombia and Mexico. Brazil's later in the year.)

laters.

I give up.

If I die of a stroke before I'm thirty, it will be the fault of the Democratic Party. I have decided this for any number of reasons, the least of which is the current 'let's all fall on the grenade together' manuever of trying to muster a filibuster of Alito. I have a number of problems with this:

1. It loses the Democrats momentum. They had the initiative, and I fear they are about to completely and totally piss it away. Consider the events of the past months: Republicans caught in corruption scandals, the war still dragging on, the government's lackluster and incompetent response to Hurricane Katrina. I mean, talk about a gift from heaven. It was a gift from heaven. It was several gifts! It was practically a plate of wings and a stripper dumped right in their laps! Now, and I do mean right now is the time for the Democrats to put together a hard hitting, coherent, easy to understand program of issues for the Midterm Elections. Think up a 'Contract With America' you guys, and run with it! Keep smacking the Republicans hard on corruption, fiscal irresponsibility and the morass of other issues that they're not doing a damn thing about (like health care, for instance. And oh, could please propose some Social Security reform while you're at it?) and you might have a decent shot in the fall. Do this filibuster idiocy and it will screw you seven ways to Sunday. It will unite the Republican base like that and give them back the one thing they're lacking right now: momentum.

2. Shameless political kow-towing: I don't like it when President Bush kow-tows to the far right wing of the Republican Party by jumping on the 'intelligent design' and 'let's ban gay marriage' bandwagon. It drives me nuts. The lunatic fringes of the American political spectrum should not, in any circumstances be in a position to force their definately out of the mainstream views down anyone's throats and that goes equally for the far right as well as the far left. (This is not to say that they can't have those views, far from it. They can say whatever the hell they want as far as I'm concerned, but by forcing the hands of either party, it essentially means that the rest of us get stuck with government by fringe minority. And that's not democratic at all.)

Kennedy started this lunacy because he can. Not like the people up there are gonna toss his ass out anytime soon. Kerry jumped onboard because he discovered a shiny new toy (the blogosphere) and wants the nomination in '08, (God help us all if he gets it.) Once Kerry was on board, that meant Hilary Clinton had to support it or risk the wrath of the loony left and so on and so forth.

Let me spell this out for everyone: the far right wins more votes that the far left in this country. Period. End of discussion. It's not going to work any other way, and yelling and screaming at the rest of the country is not going to make everyone become flower-powery and Socialistic anytime soon. So stop it.

The Democrats are becoming too narrow. The Republicans, for all their many faults have a very, very big tent, and they like everyone on their side of the spectrum inside the tent pissing out and not outside the tent pissing in (to paraphrase LBJ) in other words, Conservatism is a big tent concept now. They can appeal to hard right religious types, they can appeal to small government libertarian types they can appeal to moderate blue state types. They've got wide appeal. The Democrats, by allowing the Far Left to dictate their agenda risking narrowing their appeal. They are going to need moderate and independant voters to win anything and tying themselves to the Socialist wing of their party isn't going to do a damn thing to change that.

Some caveats:

Yes, I know the Democrats are ahead in all the polls. But ask youself why: is it because the Republicans are increasingly seen as corrupt jackasses? Or is it because the Democrats are winning the battle of ideas and persuading people that their ideas are better? I think it's the former rather than the latter. There's been no big idea from the Left that's caught my imagination recently. In order to entrench a liberal majority in D.C. they've got to win the battle of ideas, not just be prepared to assume the reins of power because people get tired of the other guy's screw ups.

I know this is about the whole 'Roe vs. Wade' thing, but I'm not as worried about that as other people are. For some people, it's the end all be all of how they vote. Not me. And I'll tell you why: overturning Roe hurts the Republicans more than it hurts the Democrats. Consider: the Republicans need the culture wars to get their base pissed off enough to vote. Overturn Roe, it's no longer a national issue and you risk a total fracture of the Republican base (libertarian types being pro-choice.) Get abortion overturned, and it becomes a state issue. So what does that leave the Republicans with? Oh yes, rising health care costs with an increasingly old population. Advantage: Democrats.

The undeniable fact of the matter is that by sticking with Roe until they die, it gives the Republicans huge advantages with their base. They can point fingers and call the Democrats baby killers in as many ways as they can think of and certain parts of their base just swoon with joy.

A Supreme Court seat, while important, isn't always a sure thing. Conservative jurists have, so far as I've seen, a great respect for precedent, and I think they'd be reluctant to overturn something that's been considered settled law and upheld time and time again for years now. Plus, once they're on the bench, they can do whatever the hell they want. Consider David Souter for example. The Right still has nightmares about that guy. Alito could be a liberal's best friend. We just don't know, and if you don't know, I don't think it's worth completely blowing your chances in the midterms over. This would be a serious blunder for the Democrats.

But, I think it's one that they're going to make anyway. So, I give up. I hated the two party system, so now I think I guess I'm going to have to hate the one party system. There's still time though, I could end up eating my words.

I'm not betting on it though.

To check out the nexus of the gang that's pushing the filibuster, go and browse the fascinating blog: DailyKos

Election Scorecard: Canada and Palestine

I've got to run to class in about ten-fifteen minutes, so I'm going to have to make this a quick post, and for that I apologize deeply, because both of these subjects are quite fascinating. But, to the matter at hand: we've had a couple of more elections since I last posted, so I thought I'd update y'all on both of them.

Canada: Everyone probably knows this already, but Canada, our northern neighbor took a right turn and handed the Conservative Party and it's leader Steven Harper a minority government to work with. The final tally of seats and vote share percentages from the CBC:

Conservative: 124 seats, 36.25%
Liberal: 103 seats, 30.22%
NDP: 29 seats, 17.49%
Bloc Quebecois: 51 seats, 10.48% o
Green: None!
Independent: 1 seat.

Basically, my post-mortem, as well as every other pundit in the Western Hemisphere is this: corrupt, scandal ridden Liberal government that had been around for nearly a decade and a half finally just got too corrupt, too scandal ridden and too damn exhausted for Canadian voters to put up with. Hence the change. But, it should be noted that this is a Conservative minority government! There may be Canadian Conservatives that dream of advancing bigger social agendas, but they have constraints upon them. Harper and company should tread carefully, which they probably will, but if they stick to the whole 'let's clean things up a bit' platform they ran on, they should be fine.

Palestine: Well, this is the shock of the morning, though I have no real idea as to why. Palestinians voted in their first parliamentary elections in about a decade yesterday and although last night there were Fatah members who were saying that they had managed to hold a slim majority on the legislative council, when the smoke cleared, this was not so! Hamas stunned everyone by securing upwards of 70-80 seats in the 132 members legislative council and everyone seems to be completely agog over what happens next. Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei and his cabinet have already resigned.

I don't know why people are surprised though. Let's look at some facts: 1. Fatah is hopelessly corrupt. We have all known this for a very long time now. Arafat and his cronies siphoned off international aid that was supposed to be going to refugees, blah blah blah. It's been a long standing complaint of everyone for years now. 2. Hamas, despite the attempts of the International community to paint it otherwise does have a political wing. And that political wing does do social welfare projects. I took a class on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a few semesters back and the prof (who'd been to the area repeatedly) told us the same story: aid organizations, if they really wanted to get the stuff where it needed to go, wouldn't go to Fatah. No way, because then it would end up in someone's pocket- no, they would go to Hamas, because at least then they would know that the aid would get to the people it was going to help.

So, we have a hopelessly corrupt ruling party and a party that has won broad popular support not only because it blows shit up but because it you know, feeds the people as well. Hamas seemed like a viable option and alternative this time, so Fatah and it's corruption gets the big ol'middle finger from the voters. We should have all seen this coming a mile and a half away.

Why this is a good thing:

Hamas wasn't expecting to get this much support. Now they actually have to govern and that's where things get interesting. It's one thing to hand out food aid and blow shit up to win support, it's quite another to be responsible for everyone's needs and developing the infrastructure of a future Palestinian state. They have to keep everyone happy now, and it's going to be interesting to see if they are up to the challenge. They may not recognize Israel, but polls show that Palestinians support the two state solution, so now they're going to have to reconcile those two notions together some how.

It gives them legitimacy. This is also a bad thing, but look what happened with the PLO and the IRA. As soon as they were brought down from the trees and governments started talking to them, it defanged them somewhat. Everyone on the radio this morning was pretty much saying the same thing: now that they're in charge, Hamas is going to have to take a long, hard look at it's position on Israel and probably change it if they want to get anywhere at all.

It's Democracy: By all accounts, this election was free and fair and both sides played by the rules. This is a refreshing change from times past where things usually were stacked in favor of the Fatah Movement so Arafat's power wasn't weakened in any way possible. All in all, I think holding free, democratic elections is a very good thing, no matter who does it. As long as all sides continue to play by the rules of the game, then we should all quietly cheer, despite the complications of having Hamas in charge.


Why this is a bad thing:

Nothing may change. In fact, things may get worse. Hamas could stick to it's guns, began a radical transformation of Palestinian society and pushing towards a more fundamentalist Islamic state which is what they're kind of aiming for, I guess. The ceasefire could break down and then it could all very easily go to hell in a handbasket. Everyone is holding their breath to see what happens next.

It gives them legitimacy: OK, this is also potentially a good thing, but they have to evolve to make it work. They cannot stick to their 'let's push the Jews into the sea' routine and expect the International community to support them. If they try to, then the Peace Process is dead in the water and that's that. We could be potentially looking at a Palestinian State run by a terrorist group that refuses to renounce the use of violence. Not a recipie for love and happiness in the region.


What everyone else should do: OK, it's very simple here. Hamas needs to: a. Renounce the use of violence. and b. Recognize the right of the state of Israel to exist. If they can do those two things to the satisfaction of the international community and Israel, then why not talk to them? And before anyone gets on their 'we don't negotiate with terrorists' horse, remember this: Arafat wasn't just some random guy they found on the street in a khuffiya- no, he was the head of the PLO and organization that most of the rest of the world considered to be a terrorist organization! Israel and the world have done this before, and provided Hamas comes down out the trees a bit and follows the two main conditions set above, then they should give them a shot and see what happens.

And I ran... I ran so far... away!

I forgot to add: Iran.

This is fast becoming the crisis of the New Year, and I've seen all kinds of things out there that are well worth reading if you want to keep up on what's going on and the really gloomy things that people are predicting. Despite the apparent push by the Western Powers to send this down the UN for another six rounds of 'should we or shouldn't we' push sanctions, I am thinking (based on what I've read) the following:

1. This thing is probably going to get much, much, worse before it gets better.
2. I wouldn't be surprised if we, Israel, NATO, or any combination of people launch airstrikes on Iran this year.

Now, some caveats: this particular equation was greatly upset by Arial Sharon's sudden stroke a couple of weeks back. With him out of the picture, the potential for Israeli military action has been pushed back until at least after their elections, I think. I could be totally wrong on that of course, but there are diplomatic avenues that can still be pursued, and so far, Israel's been willing to play that game. They may want a bit more stability, politically speaking before they risk any potential for a unilateral strike on Tehran.

The problem is that from what I've read, there are no good options for anyone here.

But, the latest news is that Iran is transferring assets out of Europe to cushion their economy against possible sanctions. I've got some more thoughts (depressing ones) over here, and some slightly less gloomy ones over here. If you want to take a peak at some regularly updated links and info on a blog, try this one here.

I'm back and I'm never leaving again!

I'm back and I'm never leaving again, I swear! Consider this the first post of the new semester and the new year, and man oh man oh man, people, I got a lot of news to update on.

Election Scorecard: We have a buncha and a half of elections to update on, the most recent being the Presidential election in Chile. Michelle Bachalet, Socialist member of the center-left coalition Concertacion won with 53% of the vote to become Chile's first elected female leader. But that's not all, for those of you not watching at home, which I'm going to assume is a lot of you, we've had the following:

Honduras saw the election of Manuel Zelaya from the Opposition Liberal Party. Another victory for the left.

Bolivia finally got the leftist Firebrand of leftist Firebrands Evo Morales elected.

Latin America is going to have a very busy year at the polls. Key elections to watch out for: in Mexico, the battle to replace Vicente Fox is probably going to start to heat up soon and in Brazil, we'll have to see if President Da Silva can manage to get himself re-elected.

So, everything south of the Rio Grande seems to be taking a left turn- but, north of the border, it seems like the Canadians have totally flipped. I know I called a status quo, things not changing much type of situation, when last I blogged, but things have totally flipped now.

The Conservatives under leader Steven Harper have a commanding, 9 point lead in the polls in the run-up to next weeks election. The latest poll breakdown:

Conservatives: 37%
Liberals: 28%
NDP: 16%
Bloc Quebecois: 12%
Green: 7%
Undecided: 15%

these numbers are from the CBC, with a margin of error of +/-3%. This is quite the turnaround from where we were heading going into Christmas. Basically, from what I can tell, around New Year's, everyone just suddenly got sick and tired of the Liberals the numbers began to trend right in a big way. Some caveats though: the Liberals could go into coalition (theoretically) with the left-leaning, ideologically similar NDP- or at least court them for support, so even if the Conservatives get the majority of seats, we'll be looking at a coalition situation of some kind. And, also, there are lots of undecideds still left. Gotta see how they swing too.

Iraq: The Shi'ites have stormed to power in the Iraqi elections, with the final results finally being released just today. The U.S. is pushing hard for the formation of a National Unity government, so don't expect any official announcement on who's running what for awhile. They've got at least 10 rounds of negotiations to go. Check out the final numbers and some analysis over at Iraq the Model (a pretty informative blog, I've discovered.)

Weah-ry at last...

Some good news from Liberia. Everyone can take a nice deep breath and relax. Former Presidential Candidate and Soccer God George Weah has dropped his fraud claims in regards to their Presidential elections. This will allow Ellen Sirleaf-Johnson to become Africa's first elected female head of state without any potential conflicts hanging over her head.

I'm glad Weah dropped this, because quite frankly, he took it a little too far to begin with in my book. I'm all for ensuring free and fair elections- but the key sticking point on making peace in Liberia work is holding elections where the losers gracefully accept defeat. OK, so if you have evidence of real fraud, check it out. Run it through the wringer a couple of times. But it shouldn't have taken this long for him to concede- not that he is, per say, according to the article. He's just magnanimously letting Liberia get on with business.

Well, whatever. It's a good thing. One mountain climbed- I don't know how many more to go.

Oh, and Elton John got hitched.

Year End Review: Movies

Everyone's been talking about what a crappy year Hollywood has been having, and I'd have to agree- but only up to a point. I thought that the summer movie season was a bit blah, and there were not huge amounts of movies knocking on my door demanding to be seen. There were however, some that just were not worth missing at all:

Top 10 Movies of 2005

1. Serenity: Only the most anticipated movie of the year for me personally. Firefly was one of those television shows that I just quickly fell in love with, and of course, because it was on Fox and Fox in its wisdom usually cancels that shows that are really good, it got canned. But, they brought it back as a movie! I was so pumped! And this movie totally lived up to my expectations. The story was advanced- with twists, turns and unexpected tragedy popping up all over the place. An eminently worthy big screen successor to a great television show. If you haven't seen this movie you should. And if you've never heard of Firefly, go out and rent it, buy it or borrow it from a friend. Both are worth seeing.

2. The Upside of Anger: This was a random choice at the time, but I was surprised at how funny, touching and well, good this movie was. Joan Allen is fantastic as a woman scorned- and I don't think I have ever been as impressed with Kevin Costner as I was in this movie. He was fantastic. And it's been awhile since I (or many people for that matter) have been able to say that.

3. Harry Potter and the Goblet Fire: Well duh, this was going to be on the list. I was impressed with this movie, but I had some issues with it as well. Mike Newell is to be commended for working with longtime Harry Potter screenwriter Steve Kloves to boil down a very dense book into a taut, fast, fantasy thrill ride that moved a long at a very brisk clip. I thought the beginning was a little jerky- but once the movie settled down the thing just rocked out and did so very hard. Ralph Fiennes as Lord Voldemort was an absolutely inspired choice. Like the Godfather of Soul, he is Super-Bad. (Though unlike James Brown, he is sans soul.)

4. The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe: Another highly anticipated movie for me that failed to disappoint. I grew up with Lord of the Rings and they rocked and I grew up with Narnia and the first of what I'm devoutly hoping will be many Narnia films was just fantastic. The acting, the story- including the bits that I had long since forgotten about all came rushing back to me the first time I sat and watched this film. It was, quite literally, like watching a piece of my childhood come to life. Tilda Swinton was dripping evil as The White Witch and although I was somewhat doubtful about Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan he won me over within like a minute. I want more of these movies. Lots more. (Prince Caspian, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader and The Horse and His Boy. Please!!!!)

5. Good Night, and Good Luck: Fed the inner nerd in me quite nicely. Plus, I think it made a far more salient point about today's politics than Michael Moore's excremental 'Farenheit 911' (not that I have anything against Moore's views personally. Hell, I agree with some of them. I just can't stand movies that make slipshod, ill-thought out arguements and F911 was one of them.) Anyway, Good Night, and Good Luck was awesome. Putting it in black and white was a wise choice- keeping it confined pretty much to the CBS News Studios was also a wise choice. Another very wise choice was having McCarthy only be seen in actual news footage. Casting an actor to play the guy would have undermined the movie. Watching and listening to McCarthy himself made it much more powerful. One of the year's best.

6. Batman Begins: The Dark Knight returned with a vengeance. A trip back to the more old-school darkness of Batman and a welcome step away from the campy colorful surrealism which made for an interesting initial departure (Batman Forever) but soon went completely and totally overboard (Batman and Robin). Christian Bale is fantastic... Liam Neeson and Cillian Murphy were great bad guys. All in all, this is probably the best Batman I have ever seen.

7. The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to The Galaxy: I love these books. I love the BBC radio series. And I love the movie. People kind of knocked it for departing from the original radio show and books for a bit, but from what I understand, Adams tweaked with things over time. So, the radio series is a little bit different than the book, the tv show different than... and so on and so forth. So that didn't bother me too much. I think they upped the love story a little too much, but despite that, it was still an awesome movie. In the current time of nonsense we live in, what more sensible advice could there be than: Don't Panic!

8. Crash: I didn't actually go and see this at the movie theater, but this has to be one of the more amazing films I've ever seen- certainly one of the best I saw this year. Race relations are still a touchy issue in this country and this movie confronted them head on in an almost brutal fashion. The acting was top notch, the story visceral, but this was a movie that you just couldn't take your eyes off of.

9. Kingdom of Heaven: This movie totally got a bum rap in my book. I found it engrossing. Everyone thought Orlando Bloom was shit in this movie. I found him tolerable- but Edward Norton, Jeremy Irons and the rest overshadowed him quite nicely and more importantly made this movie work. Plus, who can forget Saladin's response when asked what Jerusalem was worth: "Nothing..." he replied. "and everything." I really should buy this movie- when I get some more cash... I'm not even sure if I asked for it on my Christmas list. If I didn't, then I should have.

10. Shopgirl: A recent view of mine, I found it to be a nicely somber movie, but one that proved to have something of a happy ending. Steve Martin does a nice job in this movie- Clare Danes is frankly luminous and the story is suitably tragically draped in reality. I found it to be good- but sad in a way as well. Plus, for some reason the music kept creeping out to hit me in the face. It was good. Beyond good. I expected something truly tragic to come about, just on the basis of the music alone. But this movie is definately worth going to see.

Honorable Mentions:
Dukes of Hazzard
Wedding Crashers
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

Also, keep in mind that there are tons more movies coming out that I want to go and see- I'll post reviews on them when I can. (Expect reviews of The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, Shopgirl, and King-King in the near future. You can probably throw Munich and Rent in there as well.)

But, that aside- these were the movies that I dug in a big way this year. They were all good in their own, unique way- although some you had to be in the right mood for, but all in all, despite the bad news for Hollywood this year, there were plenty of gems hidden away in this rather lackluster year. At least from where I'm sitting, that is.

Monday Morning Musings

Well, we've just had another fire alarm. We seem to be plagued with them here at the Museum of Art, probably due to the new system of smokeheads we had installed during the last major renovation of the place. Now we have like super-sensitive laser based smoke detectors, which go off at the drop of a hat. I honestly think that the Fire Department is going to start giving us frequent flyer miles one of these days...

There are some things in the news worth mentioning:

John Spencer: This was an extremely sad bit of news from last week. John Spencer, longtime actor on 'The West Wing' died last Friday of a heart attack. I've been a fan of 'The West Wing' for a very long time, and Spencer's character of Leo has always been one of my favorites- he was an absolutely brilliant actor, who wholeheartedly deserved his Emmy in 2002. The sad irony of his character being a recovering alcoholic who had a heart attack and then recovered to become a Vice-Presidential candidate makes his death especially sad. His death leaves a big hole in the cast of 'The West Wing' and I honestly haven't heard yet what adjustments they'll make for the rest of the season. I am hoping, however, as I have been hoping for a long time that they decide to take a final bow and go out on top.

Tanzania's New President: Elections were held in Tanzania to select a sucessor to two-term President Benjamin Mkapa and Jakaya Kikwete seems to have won with 80.2% of the vote. Kikwete, currently Foreign Minister under President Mkapa also seems to be set to take the job with an outright majority for his CCM Party in Parliament.

Bolivia's New President: Latin America continues to sharpen and define it's political left turn, as exit polls from Bolivia seem to indicate that longtime Leftist Firebrand Evo Morales has won, perhaps an outright victory in Bolivia's Presidential election. Bolvia's had quite a bit of turmoil to deal with in recent years- and Morales looks like he's going to be good buddies with Chavez in Venezuela more than Bush in D.C. so definately not the bestest of news for the U.S. Some reaction from Publius- you can just follow their links to more blog reaction and info if you want.

Sharon's Stroke: Israeli Prime Minister Arial Sharon suffered a mild stroke Sunday afternoon, was rushed to hospital and is, apparently fine- his speech was only slightly affected or so the Doctors say. At age 77, Sharon is obviously not as young as he once was, and this stroke, however mild will probably make his health a major issue in the upcoming Israeli elections.

Canada Poll Update:
Liberals: 34%
Conservatives: 29%
NDP: 19%
BQ: 13%
Green: 5%
Undecided: 13%
--12/18/2005 Poll conducted by Strategic Counsel for Globe and Mail-CTV News: margin of error +/-2.5%

Hmmm, well the gap between the Conservatives and the Liberals seems to have narrowed somewhat. Whether it will continue to narrow remains to be seen. The Conservatives need to break 30% and get some more momentum going- the Liberals, in fact everyone needs to hope that a majority of the Undecided voters (still a pretty big-ass chunk at this point) breaks their way. But, it's not even halftime yet and we've still got a ways to go. But we do have movement.

That's all for now. I await the delivery of my lunch...

Year End Review: Music

This year has been something of a busy musical year for me. I've discovered all kinds of fascinating new groups that have been around for ages, but had, until this year, failed to pop-up on my radar. So, if I wax lyrical about some band that's been an integral part of your CD collection for years, please forgive me. I was adventurous this year and discovered a lot of good music because of it.

That said, here are my top 10 albums/bands/musicians of 2005:

1. Death Cab for Cutie- Plans: I was atrociously late finding DCFC, but I'm glad I showed up to the party so to speak, rather than not showing up at all. I do have both 'Transatlanticism' and 'Plans' now, as I fell head over heels in love with these guys- albeit in a manly, platonic kind of way. Their music is lyrical and melodic and perfectly suited for any number of my moods, ranging from angsty to out and out depressed and even back to the mildly happy. Their lyrics are fantabulous beyond belief- so well written and most of them are very, very poignant. Sort of mournful, but excellent stuff. Tom says: Very, very hot.

2. Fall Out Boy- From Under the Cork Tree: The now ubiquitous top 40 hit, 'Sugar I'm Going Down' sucked me into the phenomenon that is Fall Out Boy and so far it hasn't let me go. These guys are a little less mellow than DCFC- in other words, they're not afraid to be loud- and once again, their lyrics are fantastic. Any band with a song named: 'Our Lawyer Made Us Change The Name of This Song So We Wouldn't Get Sued' has got to be cool. Tom says: uber-HOT!

3. The Futureheads- The Futureheads: My cousin, Em, (big shout out to any readers who go to Nottingham University. Woo-woo, go Fighting... Notts? I guess?) flung me into a world of indy punk hard rockin' bands that just plain kick ass. She hasn't steered me wrong yet- and The Futureheads were a band that only confirmed my opinion that she has excellent taste in music. Hailing from Sunderland in the UK (so they sing with waaaaaay cool accents), these guys rock out majorly with wicked guitar hooks and you know... loud indy rock music. Worth a peek- plus, they have a cover of the Kate Bush song 'Hounds of Love' that everyone needs to go and download right now. I'm serious, peeps. Get to it! Tom says: Hot as you can get.

4. Franz Ferdinand- You Could Have It So Much Better: Franz Ferdinand oh so totally beats the dreaded sophomore slump in style. More of what you peeps should have grooved on with their first album and then some. The title track kicks ass, 'The Fallen' has some wicked hooks and 'Do You Want To' is probably the first serious attempt at a punk-dance track that's actually worked. Tom says: Oh yeah, bay-bee!

5. Coldplay- X & Y: Always has rocked my face off. Period. End of discussion- however, they followed up 'A Rush of Blood To The Head' with such gems as 'Speed of Sound,' 'White Shadows', and 'Talk,' all of which made this album totally worth it. Tom says: So cold, it's HOT!

6. Kaiser Chiefs- Employment: Another reccomendation from cousin Em that panned out well. My last, end of the summer purchase which proved to be a happy one. Who couldn't love such songs as: I Predict A Riot, Everyday I Love You Less and Less and Oh My God. Seriously, these guys rock hard- and even if you're an old geezer who hasn't listened to anything new and rockin' since Bon Jovi released 'Slippery When Wet' you will have to admit that these guys can rock- and in a good way. Tom says: Hot.

7. Depeche Mode- Playing the Angel: The last of my specific albums- Depeche Mode has always been one of my all time favorite bands period- and this new album of there's marks something of a return to form for them. Don't get me wrong- the sort of slow, cool acoustic grooves of 'Dream On' were cool, but it's nice to get the old D-Mode with the heavy industrial techno type sound back. Way cool stuff, even if you have no idea who these guys are. I reccomend highly: Tom says- very, very HOT.

8. Pixies: My cousin's favorite band and one I have to admit I was happy to discover. Hard core post-punk (if they can be defined as post punk. I'm sure some music nut is going to correct me on that.) they rock hard and have vicious hooks (Debaser) and fun lyrics (Gouge Away, Wave of Mutilation) that generally make them the perfect music to listen to if you've had a shitty day and are pissed off at the world. Tom says: Cool- and hot at the same time.

9. Fiona Apple: I've been vaguely aware of Fiona for quite some time now- but it wasn't until this year with her new album that my love affair really took off. That, combined with the fact that I was informed that a love of Fiona would raise my potential for getting laid on a regular basis in a big way and that it was 'hot' made me explore her music even more. 'Extraordinary Machine' probably ranks as one of the top albums of the year- and her second album 'When the Pawn' is worth checking out as well. In general, she's worth checking out. And you should. Tom says: Hot, but in an angry way.

10. Flogging Molly: A very late addition that came out of the festivities of finals week combined with Steven King's (yes, that Steven King) latest column in Entertainment Weekly. I had heard of these guys, but I had never actually bothered to listen to any of their stuff. After Steven King had one of their singles as one of his 'Picks of the Year' and after I had been subjected to an incredulous stare of disbelief when I revealed I had none of their stuff on my computer, I decided that an investigation was in order. And man oh man, did I like what I heard. Where, I thought, has this band been all my life? Traditional Irish music fused with Rock n'Roll/punk? Probably the coolest thing I've ever heard... Tom says: Check them out. Now. At the very least, they'll liven up your St. Paddy's Day party next year.

So there you have it. My picks for the year in music. Probably fairly unimpressive, I know, but there they are.

Year End Review: The Democrats

It's that time of year, so I'm going to start going back and forth in between the worlds of pop culture and international and domestic politics and start dishing out my reviews on just hot various things actually were. It's basically a sort of 'are you hot or not' for the entire year. Or at least as much of it as I can blog before the year actually ends.

First up, the Democrats.

I'll be honest with ya, peeps. I'm not a fan of the two party state on the best of days. I just think there's something almost restrictive about it- and this country especially... democracy should be fast, raw, raucous and vigorous- and I've never brought into the notion that only two parties can perfectly represent a country as big as this.

However, the Democrats are just pissing me off. They've been pissing me off for quite awhile, but lately, it's taken something of an upswing. Like I said, the two party system does not ring my bells or get me all hot and flustered- quite the opposite. However much of a detractor of two parties I am, however, moving towards a de-facto one party state pleases me even less.

I'm going to have to try very hard to do this without having a psychotic episode and throwing the roomie's laptop across the room. (I'm blogging on his laptop currently.) But, this is pretty much my views on what the Democrats are doing wrong and what they should be doing in the future:

1. The War: This isn't really a problem for the Democrats. There is a large chunk of the electorate that is either against or very concerned about our progress or lack thereof in Iraq, and it's a valid point of view that should be represented in our political system. However, their opposition to the war needs to be fine-tuned a bit, so it can be more effective. First and foremost, no more kneejerking 'Bush Lied, People Died' and 'No Blood For Oil' schtick. It doesn't work. When you do that, you pander to the crazy left, which is just as bad as the GOP pandering to the crazy right- you can oppose the war in a sensible way that could, theoretically score you some political points.

So, step one, stop pandering to the crazy left already. It's annoying. I hate them, and I'm not die-hard, dyed in the wool Conservative. (If you think I'm being rough on you guys, you wait until I get to the GOP, hehehehe...)

Step Two: STOP TALKING ABOUT PRE-WAR Intelligence!!!!! No one, and I do mean no one cares. It's the wrong thing to focus on- we're in this mess, and we're there- we don't care how we got there, we want to know what you, as the Democratic Party are going to do to extricate us from this ideological orgasm that the Republicans had over the thought of spreading American democracy throughout the Middle East. Tell us how we're getting out and stop obsessing about how we got there.

Step Three: Don't mention Vietnam anymore, please. Firstly, let me say very clearly: I respect people who fought in Vietnam- their sacrifice and service deserves to be honored, and I would not have any qualms about shaking the hand of a Vietnam Vet and thank him for serving his country. That said, I could care less what any Democratic Politician did or did not do in Vietnam. (John Kerry, I'm looking at you, man! So pay attention!) I want to know what you're going to do for me tomorrow- how you're going to save my Social Security and my Medicare. So you drove a boat up the Mekong a few decades back. Congratulations. You and how many other American soldiers were there?

So yeah. No more Vietnam vets who can't get over the fact they were in Vietnam. Leading on from this is the whole Vietnam quagmire, so Iraq automatically is quagmire thing. I do think there is a very large demographic in the Democratic Party that can't really let go of the fact that thirty years ago, they all had flowers in their hair, smoked a lot of pot, and sat around in drum circles singing Kumbaya. That war was that war and this war is this war. Things (including your opposition) should be different now.

OK, so that's your war problem out of the way. Now we get onto a few other bits and bobs. First of all, I think we need a good does of pragmatism in our politics and you can provide that- we need to have you guys step away from being the 'anti-Bush' party and towards being an actual focused, razor sharp, opposition party. This means you need to start proposing your own ideas and set your own agenda in simple, easy to understand terms that you can sell to the American people. In other words, I am convinced that you people need your own 'Contract With America.'

But we are doing things, Tom. We're fighting the good fight and all that jazz. Ok- but the Republicans proposed Social Security reform- which you know damn well we need and you guys just said No. That's all you said. I'm sick and tired of hearing 'No' from the Democratic Party. I want to hear, 'No, and here's our idea and here's why it's better.' That's what I want to hear.

So, solve your war problem, focus your agenda a bit- and start exploiting the cracks in the Republican base already. Stop, take a deep breath and use your heads a bit. You people should be nailing Bush and co. to the wall on spending. What happened to fiscal discipline? What happened to the balanced budget? Our debt is increasingly be found in the hands of foreign countries- and that has national security implications. Hit hard on spending and things other than the war.

Overall, I'd say things are not completely hopeless for the Democratic Party. They had a good couple of months awhile back, but it seems that the GOP is slowly making a comeback- but the Democrats can and do have the potential to mount a comeback- they just need to make some adjustments. We're starting to head towards the second half and maybe then need shake up the playbook a bit.

Oh, and for the love of GOD! Hire someone to stand behind Howard Dean with a 2 x 4. Everytime he says something incredibly stupid and dumb that's going to give the GOP I don't know how much in fundraising and ads, hit in the back of the head with it. Hard.

My Final Verdict: Blah. Have the potential to be both hot and not in the coming year and are in something of a funk at the present time.

O, Canada!

I think I've mentioned this before, but Canada is set to have an election next month, and as it's pretty much par for the course that we down here in the sunny, balmy south (so to speak) don't know jack about Canada (myself included) I thought I would do some digging and at least set out the basics on who's who, what's what and just what the hell these crazy Canadians are doing having an election in the middle of winter anyway.

I know the cardinal rule of blogging is to use a spectacular spectrum of all kinds of eye-catching, sexy sources, but I'm just out for the basic information here- I could give a damn about people's opinion of the candidates and parties- that comes for later posts, this post is 'just the facts, ma'am' and as such, I went to a source that has all the info bundled up in one, easy to get place: the fine folks at the Canadian Broadcasting System.

So without further ado, I give you: Canada

The Info:

The Liberals:
--Leader: Paul Martin, Current Prime Minister

Alignment: Center Left
Number of Seats Held: 135 out of 308 seats in Canadian House of Commons
The Lowdown: These guys are pretty much the dominant party in Canadian politics and have been enjoying a pretty long 12 year stretch in charge of the place for quite some time now, mainly under the leadership of now ex-Prime Minister Jean Chretien- and now under his successor, Paul Martin. They've hit some rocky spots, however: first of all was a major storm of corruption (see below) that severely damaged their standings in the polls and left them running a minority government after elections this past June. So, the Liberals have kept limping along, striking a more conciliatory tone on the big issues and relying on the opposition parties to get work done. They brought the NDP (next up on our list!) in by promising to spend more money on New Democratic Priorities- and for about six months or so that worked. However, Prime Minister Paul Martin promised to call an election within 30 days of the final report on the corruption scandal, however, the opposition parties banded together to move that date forward, thus plunging Canada into it's current electoral brouhaha.


The New Democrats:
--Leader: Jack Layton

Alignment: Left
Number of Seats Held: 19 out of 308 seats in the Canadian House of Commons
The Lowdown: A solidly leftist party, the New Democrats have something of a Socialist flavor, being reluctant supporters of the Liberal Government and yet feeling that they haven't gone far enough. Job creation, de-criminalization of marijuana and improving the health care system are all big issues for this party- recently, their support got the Liberal Government's budget through the House of Commons, with an extra $4.6 billion added for NDP priorities. Yet they broke with the Liberals to force an election.

The Bloc Quebecois:
--Leader: Gilles Duceppe

Alignment: Sovreignty of Quebec
Number of Seats Held: 53 out of 308 seats in the Canadian House of Commons
The Lowdown: Pretty simple to explain: they want out of Canada and as soon as they can possibly manage it. Failing that, they're basically around to push Quebec's interests on the federal level- on fiscal matters, they're all about keeping as much money as they can handle under local control- and interestingly enough, they're advocates for a common currency of the Americas, which I didn't know.

The Conservatives:
--Leader: Steven Harper

Alignment: Right
Number of Seats Held: 99 out of 308 seats in the Canadian House of Commons (Official Opposition Party)
The Lowdown: Well, as you might expect, these guys are Conservative- and if any of this stuff sounds familiar to us down here in America, there's probably a reason for it. They push strongly for individual rights and responsibilities- free from governmental interference- fiscally, they're all about tax cuts, tough on crime, want to look at more local and private control for the Health Care system up there. (Sound like anyone we know? Or, rather, used to know?)

The Issues:
I'm not going to break down the whole chart of issues and all that jazz- if you really want to know that, you can go here and check this out- and see who you would vote for if you were in Canada, or something like that, I suppose. I will however, touch on this corruption thing and the perennial headaches of Quebec and The West.

The Corruption Scandal was basically this: the Liberal Government hired advertising firms (a few years back) to run campaigns, using pro-Liberal ad agencies, and then somehow no work got done and an awful lot of money got re-routed back into Liberal Party coffers. A big no-no. Anyway, they appointed a Judge, John Gomery to look into this mess and if you want to know more, here's his report.

Quebec and The West: Quebec's always been something of a sticky wicket in Canadian politics, as they're pretty blunt in their desire to get the hell out as fast as they can- last time they held a referendum on the issue was in 1995, and it came very close to passing (50.6% to 49.4%). However, that was the second rejection of independence for Quebec by Quebekers, the first being in 1980 by a 60-40 margin, and it sounds like the pro-Independance folks up there aren't going to go for a third try unless they're sure they've got a home run in the bag. But, the beast is stirring again, so we may see another referendum attempt in the next couple of years. The West too has been an issue in Canadian politics- but it's more of a mild headache than serious threat to Canadian stability- at least in the short term. Basically, the Western Provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan) don't like Ontario. They think that they have all the natural resources (which they do) and they should get a wee bit more control, money and respect for that. Instead, the general feeling is that they get continually shafted by the Federal Government in Ottawa. It's probably not going to be much of an issue in the election, but it's a long-standing gripe that has the potential (maybe) over the long term to morph into a Western twin to Quebec's eastern desire to get the hell out, as it were.

Current Polls and Prediction as of today:
Liberals: 36%
Conservatives: 27%
NDP: 17%
BQ: 14%
Green: 4%
Undecided: 14%
**Poll from 12/9-12/11, +/-3.1 percentage points

Prediction: No real change. I know it's still kind of early on in the game- we're only heading into week 3, and according to this poll, anyway, there are a pretty decent amount of undecided voters out there who are potentially up for grabs. Whichever party can get the majority of those folks to break for them could see some gains- or losses. But, the main opposition party, the Conservatives just aren't gaining any traction against the Liberals. Right out of the starting gate they were pretty strong, but now the air appears to have been let out of the balloon and it doesn't appear to be going back in yet. So that means, coalition deals will have to be made- and I think that favors the Liberals, as the NDP and the Greens are (potentially) more reliable allies, at least ideologically for them- and I can't see any reason that the Bloc Quebecois would join with a firmly pro-Federalist party like the Conservatives, even if it is just to keep the Liberals out.

I don't know. No one's gaining ground on the Liberals though, so this election could be very anti-climactic. I guess the opposition parties won't be so quick to force an election in the dead of winter next time though.

If you want some professional, slick coverage of this get your hands on the December 9th issue of The Economist. They've got a fourteen page report on all this stuff that is, of course, fantastic.

Finals Week: The Sunday Edition

Man, I should be studying for something right now. I'm not sure what. Probably everything. I'm a bit front-loaded this finals week- with a test tomorrow (Hindi, open book. Only minor worries as the answers are all going to be right there.) and then two on Tuesday- (Age of Dinosaurs, minor worries again- nearly slept thru the first midterm, didn't really study, still got a solid C. and Modern Political Theory- big worry. Need to do well on it.)

And then of course there's French grammar to deal with.

But everything's under control- I hope. Anyway:

Dave Review!: Sat down and watched David Cameron's first time out in the House of Commons on C-SPAN tonight, and all in all I didn't think he didn't do too badly. I mean, it was his first time out, and given that, he did pretty well. He didn't really get caught into a serious round with Blair- but he took a few potshots- some of which hit home nicely. I'll say this for him, though: he provides a very noticeable contrast. Him: young, vital, energetic. Blair: The Lion in Winter, looking older, slightly creaking around the edges but still pretty damn formidable. The only thing that bugged me: his hands. Blair likes to lean on the dispatch box, and he's very expressive with his hands- body language wise I got the feeling that Cameron really didn't know what to do with his. He kept slipping into this sort of joystick, button pushing kind of hand motion that sort of annoyed me. But he's just starting out, he can adjust. Overall, I'd say life is going to get interesting.

Richard Pryor died, as did noted anti-War activist former Senator Eugene McCarthy.

Presidential elections in Chile will probably go into a second round- with another advance for women in politics looking increasingly likely, as incumbent party candidate Michelle Bachelet looks to be on track to be Chile's First Female President.

Hmmm, well anyway, back to the books for me now. But! I have seen 'The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe' and am set to go and see 'King Kong' next weekend, so you can expect reviews on both of those. And any other quick tidbits that will serve as a useful study break!

Monday, Tuesday, then a week of craziness and fun to celebrate. That's my goal.

Wednesday Night Procrastination (with beer!)

In lieu of doing things for finals, I'd thought I would throw a few more things out there to the world in general:

The world has gone insane: The White House used 'Happy Holidays' on it's Christmas Cards instead of 'Merry Christmas' and people are foaming at the mouth over it. Happily, some brilliant person has put all these rabid paranoid fulminations in one list, so go here, and peruse at your leisure.

There was however, a beautiful reason to smile, thanks to the people at DailyKos.com. Sadly, to give Bill credit, which I don't like doing, but must grudgingly do from time to time, he's changed his website. The menu tab in question is now 'Reccomended Christmas Gifts.' Fine Bill, I'll give you points for being consistent- not many mind you, but like two. That seems fair- and don't think you're going to get a biscuit for it either.

If you want to be scared to death, try these two bits: There's an interesting and quite frankly 'scary as shit' analysis of the Iran situation from these guys- Not being totally plugged into the military analysis side of things, I'm not sure how solid they are, but they seem to have all their stuff right. And it's pretty scary shit. Think of the possibilities and try to sleep tonight, I dare ya.

Mark your calendars for this one as well- if you see a big ball of fire coming towards you in 31 years, run like hell.

Meet the new Boss: David Cameron named his shadow cabinet today- the big news being the return of former Tory Leader William Hague to the frontbenches as Shadow Foreign Secretary. As it turns out, I could have caught PM's Questions live this morning on C-SPAN as the roomie was up at 4 A.M. doing homework, and then, inexplicably, for reasons I'm still not clear on went and retrieved his car so he could go to the grocery store around 6.30 A.M. this morning. However, he brought back fruit juice, so I have no complaints.

Some reviews and thoughts from around the British Press on his first time out at Question time:
The Guardian
BBC
The Independent
The Times


Tidbits from Sports:
--Iowa lost to UNI, 63-67, in overtime up at the UNIDome last night- bringing the men's record to 7-2.

--Bowl games have been pretty much finalized at this point, and happily for the fans of the BCS system, Texas and USC did not screw up and send everything straight down the toilet- instead they both won, making the National Championship game pretty obvious for once- they'll meet in the Rose Bowl this year. Iowa has scored a rematch with Florida in the Outback Bowl- which I'm betting is going to be a very good game.

--The UNI football team is continuing to advance, though, I'm sort of sorry to say that precious few people outside of the Waterloo area are really noticing. I do think the playoff system that Division 1-AA Football has is eminently sensible. And if the BCS turns into anarchy more than once in the coming years, I think that's where we'll end up. Anyway, UNI beat top-ranked New Hampshire to squeeze into the semis- where they will, apparently, be playing Texas State. Go Panthers, I guess.

All right, that's all I got. Hindi review and further work on my French Grammar portfolio await.

The War on Christmas

I've had to control my rage and irritation at how stupid people are and try and re-write this post in a more moderate, sane and sensible manner. This time of year always seems to have rants popping up all over the place about the evil, secular war on Christmas- some dastardly liberal plot to attack Christians again and blah blah blah. We've all heard this now and again- various objections to people saying 'Happy Holidays' instead of specifying which holiday, and people calling trees 'Holiday Trees' instead of 'Christmas Trees.'

Before I get into that, I have to take a deep breath and make a couple of disclaimers: 1. I'm a Christian. Well, to be more accurate I'm a Catholic. Raised in a household where we had to go to Church until we were 18 every Sunday whether we wanted to or not. OK, I don't go regularly anymore but that has more to do with my many issues (too numerous to discuss here) with the Catholic Church than it does with any particular lack of faith- and the fact of the matter is that every Christmas we all trot on down to Midnight Mass as a family. So, I'm not an athiest in any way, shape or form. 2. I'm a registered Independant. I have a very long list of things I dislike about both the Republican and Democratic Parties, and I subscribed to neither of the ideologies currently being shoved down our throats by the extreme wings of both parties. I consider myself a solid Moderate. So, I'm not a loony leftist, either.

Good, now that's been said, I can get into the meat of the issue: This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. It's paranoid and not even all that well thought out and here's why:

1. What secular progressive agenda? I know all you people on the right like to pretend that you're all martyrs and victims of some evil liberal plot that's out to take your guns and make you marry gay people or something equally hysterical, but guys, seriously now- take a deep breath and look around Washington D.C. You guys have Congress, you have the White House and you're coming very close to stacking the Supreme Court with solid ideological Conservatives for the next twenty to fifty years. You guys are ruling the roost right now and the left can't seem to find it's ass with an atlas. So, I ask you people: what secular progressive agenda? I defy you to find me the agenda that's out to destroy Christmas, please! Prove me wrong! It's just not there. You guys have been in the trenches way too long and you're seeing Liberal conspiracies behind every corner. Relax already. No one is going to ban Christmas, because you guys are running the joint here. And as the Republican Party you command the votes of an awful lot of what now? Oh, that's right: Christians! Do you really mean to tell me that the some secular progressive conspiracy is going to be able to outmaneuver the party that's running Washington right now? (And if you do tell me that, then I think you severely overestimate the ability of the ACLU to impact things anywhere.)

2. No one cares: Honest to God, this is the biggest nonesense issue I've ever seen. No one cares. As a Christian, if someone tells me 'Happy Holidays' I'm not going to give a rat's ass, because I'll know what holiday they are in all likelihood referring to despite Bill O'Reilly's stunning assertion that the greeting 'Happy Holidays' is offensive to Christians:

Most recently, O'Reilly revealed a new front in the "war on Christmas" on his November 9 television show when he discussed his "decision to look at some retail policies this year" regarding which seasonal greeting major retailers will use with their customers. In response to a guest's argument that nondenominational salutations did not offend Christians, O'Reilly responded, "Yes, it does. It absolutely does."

(Unlike him, I'm not going to presume to speak for all Christians. But I know it doesn't offend me.)

Let's look at the calendar year here, people: in the months of November and December you have the following religious- and indeed secular holidays: (Note that the key word there is holidays.) Halloween, Diwali, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving, Pearl Harbor Day, Ramadan, Hannukah, Christmas, New Year's and hell, let's be generous and throw in Kwanzaa. That's 10, count them carefully, ten holidays in a two month period. That's a lot of Holidays- and given the fact that Christmas is supposed to be about spreading tidings of joy and good cheer to your fellow human beings, should we be offended is someone wants to wish us a little bit of happiness for each and every one of these holidays? Not if we have half a brain we shouldn't! Spreading joy and cheer whether you say 'Happy Holidays' or 'Merry Christmas' is at the heart of what Christmas is about. It's about showing a little cheer and goodwill to everyone out there. So this idea that 'Happy Holidays' is offensive is well, let's just call it what it is: silly.

3. If we really want to celebrate the birth of Jesus, we're probably doing it at the wrong time of year: let's pause for a moment, shall we and consider the following quote from one of the many idiots behind this idiocy, FoxNews anchor, John Gibson:

by refusing to say the word "Christmas." And what I've noticed is the way this appears in schools, for instance, is we now don't call it the Christmas break. It's the winter break, as if people worship winter. And there wouldn't be a winter break if there wasn't Christmas at that time of year. So once you call it -- change the name. You won't use the word "Christmas," then you go to "winter," you can sort of push the Christmas thing out of public view

Oh, this makes me laugh so much. 'As if people worship winter...' you know John, it's funny that you mention that, because back in the day, hey, what did the pagans have their major festivals on? Oh yeah! The Winter and Spring Solstice? I think so! What a fascinating coincidence that two major Christian holidays should fall on or around those two dates. (And if you're thinking that maybe our early Christian predecessors moved some dates around so they could convert more pagans, then you'd probably be right.)

If you have such an issue with preserving the true meaning of the holiday then under your logic, we shouldn't be celebrating it on the 25th of December at all, as there's plenty of historical evidence out there that seems to suggest (using Biblical sources no less) that Jesus wasn't born anywhere near December. So John, how about it? Let's move Christmas, shall we? If we're going to celebrate it right, we should celebrate the birth of Jesus on the right date shouldn't we?

I'm not even going to go near the Holiday Tree vs. Christmas Tree thing that Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert decided to get into a snit about. (Shouldn't you be doing something more productive with your time, like say, investigating the BCS? Oh wait...) Let's face it: we, as a nation are not stupid people. A conifer in December, with a bunch of pretty lights on it is a Christmas tree and we all know it. You could call it the 'The Great and Wonderful Non-Denominational Conifer of Secular Humanism' and people across the country wouldn't be fooled: the damn thing is a Christmas tree and we all know it. So who cares what the official literature calls it?

In short, it's not Liberals that are destroying Christmas- the true meaning of the Holiday tends to get a bit lost in the overly materialistic view that we all- including most of the people bitching about this- have developed over the years. It tends to be more about making sure retailers have a good holiday shopping season and that we all get cool things for each other than it does anything else. In short, I kinda agree. The true meaning of the holiday does get lost a bit in the shuffle- and gentle reminders from people to be a little less materialistic and remember the less fortunate are always welcome- because being a little less materialistic is always good, right?

Basically, if you follow this 'war on Christmas' argument to it's logical conclusion, then I hope Bill O'Reilly's going to stop giving everyone in his family Christmas gifts, because that's where this is heading. It's the materialism that shuffles the true meaning of Christmas to the back of the line, not anything ideological. And under their logic, the only way to combat that would be to stop buying each other gifts and go to Church. Which is a perfectly valid response, I suppose- and I'd respect people who actually did that. But, unless O'Reilly and company are going to take the lead in curbing our materialistic and worldly desires at this time of year by leading by example, then they should, quite frankly, shut the hell up.

So, if you're worried about people (or your children) losing the true meaning of Christmas, then give something to the Salvation Army bellringers when you're out shopping. Buy a toy and hook up with the Toys for Tots things that the Marine Corps always does- or even better, sit down and watch A Charlie Brown Christmas and pay special attention to what Linus tells Charlie Brown when he asks what the true meaning of Christmas actually is.

Dave vs. Dave

The Tories have a new leader, and it turns out that the younger, less grizzled Dave has come out on top in the Dave vs. Dave deathmatch. Yes, David Cameron has the pleasure of being named the next sacrificial lamb- sorry, Tory Leader to face down Tony Blair and the Labour juggernaut- (that even I have to admit is looking a bit creaky nowadays). Cameron's margin of victory: 134,446 votes to 64,398 for David Davis. Reaction and the basics from the BBC, more thoughts from the Independent (Gordon Brown, Labour's Heir Apparent is getting his mojo working already, taking potshots at the new guy...) and check this out from the Independent as well- talk about a wise bet:

* Mr Cameron's triumph was worth £208,000 to a Windsor-based Irish businessman customer of bookmakers William Hill, who staked £200,000 a fortnight ago when Mr Cameron was 1/25 favourite. Before the Conservative Party Conference, he was a 12/1 outsider.

The Guardian weighs in, as does the Times and the Telegraph.

My thoughts: I think they've finally done it. I think they've managed to pull their heads out of their asses and pick someone sensible for once. Not only is David Cameron young and telegenic (at 39), but he's had a relatively quick rise that means he probably won't be able to pinned with the usual Labour potshots about what so and so did when they were in such and such a position during the last Conservative government. So I think the Tories have probably taken a great step forward in shaking the image of them being the party of pensioners and old people with this choice. I'm not sure yet how much they'll be able to appeal to the hip and cool crowd in the British electorate, but at least now they sort of have a valid case to make.

Cameron is also starting with one hell of a mountain to climb. In many ways (but not all) the Tories are in sort of the same position that the Democrats are. Their ideology and their ideas were dominant in British politics for most of the last century, and then suddenly they ran out of gas and were thrown out on their ear by a resurgent opposition that had ideas and teeth. (Of course, the Democrats have more problems than just a lack of new ideas, but I don't want to get sidetracked here, otherwise I'll be here all day.) Dave is speaking a great deal about 'compassionate conservatism', which had better mean something a lot different in the UK than it does here- but I think that with Dave's election to the job of Tory leader, there's been a sort of realization that as a party, they need an image makeover (and with a young, dynamic, telegenic leader they might have that in spades) and they also need to reinvent and redefine conservatism in Britain for the twenty-first century if they are ever to have a realistic shot at getting back into power. And given Cameron's ties to the more moderate leftish set of the so-called 'Notting Hill Modernizers' he may be the leader to do just that.

But, all in all I'd say a good choice and a very good move on the part of the Tories. Mr. Cameron will have to find his footing a bit, but we'll see how things go. (His first Prime Minister's Questions is tomorrow! But given the fact that the roomie is sleeping on the couch now to preserve the health of his back, I'll probably have to wait until Sunday to catch the replay on C-SPAN, as I'm sure he wouldn't appreciate being rousted out of bed at 6 am, just so I can catch it live.)