Friday, October 09, 2009

How to Win the Nobel Peace Prize in One Day

You know what, Joel Stein? The POTUS himself, as well as your article in TIME Magazine, has inspired me today. If Barack Obama can win the Nobel Peace Prize after completing barely nine months in office and accomplishing very little of worldly caliber beforehand, then I ought to be able to win this accolade in just one day's time.

Do you see how that works, Joel? When you deride Sarah Palin for writing her autobiography in "just four months," you expose your hypocrisy. And you invite shame -- not that you care.

Perhaps I'll follow this up with an easy layup:

If, as you imply, Sarah Palin should have devoted more than four months to the writing of her autobiography-worthy life account, then certainly you agree that Barack should have at least written "Dreams From My Father," the account of his quotidian life prior to even becoming a presidential candidate, himself.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Hey, look over here!

Hillary Clinton is still in this -- in spirit, anyway. She has way fewer delegates than Barack Obama has, and while it is literally the case that neither is in a position to win enough support to capture the nomination before the Democratic National Committee's national convention in Denver, Colo., she already looks like the bad guy (oh, I mean bad gal -- or do I?). And she will look the same way in Denver no matter how well she fares in contests here on out.

It's almost as if she's lost in a bad Maine joke: She can't get there from here. This is where things get interesting. We now begin to see just how antagonizing an antagonist she'll be by the time August rolls around.

The powers that be in the Democratic National Committee don't like Mrs. Clinton. It seems that way. Doesn't it? They never have, for all we know. But that's neither here nor there. They don't like her right now; that's for certain, and few if any Democrats in power these days even like political rock star incarnate Bill Clinton anymore, either. OK, enough do; I suppose the Clinton campaign wouldn't have anyone to run it if nobody liked them anymore.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is many, many people in high places are upset that Hillary Clinton is still in this. We have no proof. Well, I wouldn't go that far; the most important Kennedys, for instance, back Barack Obama, and we may infer from their actions a not-so-subtle, indirect request on the part of party elders (or wise men or drunks, depending on your sentiments) for Hillary to get out. Think the scene from "The Amityville Horror" where the unseen, evil entity tells the priest to get out of that room upstairs (and sends a regiment of flies to make sure he does so).

Let's just say no smoking gun on this theory has surfaced. But I have my suspicions. And the past couple of 24-hour news cycles have been suspicious indeed. I give you two exhibits, dear reader(s), that encapsulate what the warring factions want us to think. But you get more than what they want you to have: an explanation of what these developments really mean.

Exhibit A: Geraldine Ferraro

Word surfaced this week of seemingly less-than-media-savvy remarks from Geraldine Ferraro, former U.S. congresswoman, 1984 vice-presidential nominee on the Democratic ticket, and heavy-hitting fundraiser for the Hillary Clinton campaign. The words were a heavy hit indeed. Evidently, Ferraro suggested that Obama had achieved his success in this campaign by virtue of his skin color alone, and further suggested that Hillary Clinton, by virtue of being a woman (who knew?), had not achieved the success that the former first lady's achievements warranted.

Geraldine Ferraro is a smart woman. She knows better than to make such gaffes. Let's call a spade a spade (if we still can...): Ferraro is sabotaging the Clinton campaign. This part is easy to figure out:

Does anyone think blacks (i.e., Obama's "corest" of core political bases) will appreciate Ferraro's comments? No, they'll flank ever more steadfastly behind Obama, and with good reason.

And does anyone think Ferraro's comments were some huge revelation to Hillary's supporters (e.g., women who think everyone's against them because they're women)? No, they'll follow Hillary over a cliff, and with characteristic lack of reason.

These dynamics we know. But what has got to be galling to Hillary's campaign is that Ferraro may have said all this in public on purpose -- orchestrating it, no less.

I submit to you, my loyal reader(s), that Ferraro is already on the proverbial commune in Guyana with the rest of the Obama backers, drinking the metaphorical Kool-Aid. For this, she may not be so smart, but we'll leave that well enough alone for now, because here's where the "Geraldine Ferraro is a smart woman" part does come in:

Ferraro damaged Hillary's campaign while pretending to support it. That took not only smarts, but balls (or ovaries, depending on your sentiments). She is now free to leave Hillary's campaign for superficially legitimate reasons and work behind the scenes for "someone else's" campaign. Eventually, she may publicly atone for her sins against political correctness and come out swinging for Obama in a big way.


Exhibit B: Now-former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer

Talk about a convenient distraction. You see, the internecine battle in the Democratic Party, which Obama's failure to deep-six Hillary in Texas and Ohio has wrought, is great for Hillary and horrible for Democrats. Every opportunity for a food fight gets Hillary in the news, where she wants to be and where the DNC doesn't want her.

What is a poor anti-Hillary Democrat leader to do? Leak a sex scandal!

But Republican sex scandals are just so old hat these days. No, no Republican sex scandal would have done the trick (sorry...) this time around. The bloodletting had to be internal, and this sex scandal's villain had to be a Democrat.

Enter Eliot Spitzer, another pawn in the Democrats' civil war. (Remember: Ferraro is no pawn. She's just a woman who made a shrewd move that will make her better...stronger...faster.)

Just as the presidential campaign for Hillary Clinton, that put-upon woman who's put up with so much that she now deserves the presidency if for no other reason than simply being a woman whose husband cheated on her with a zaftig intern, was ramping up for a major offensive, Eliot Spitzer rolled in to (again) spoil her momentum.

You've got to hand it to Eliot. He's the most inept political friend ever, a useful idiot for anyone who might need one.

First, he unwittingly leaves the steaming pile of doggy doo that is driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. Hillary's enemies on the left and right pounced on that bumbling piece of legislative excrement, and those of you following the saga know Hillary tried to scoop up the doo at a debate earlier this year, only to leave pieces on the ground.

And now Eliot leaves another steaming pile of doggy doo, one of such grand dimensions that the media can't even pay attention to Hillary, so enamored they are with this pile of doo that spans the political sidewalk's entire width. (Any sex scandal will yield this effect. Try it at home. You'll see.)

As politician, Spitzer seems like a dunce. Democrat elders aren't. And that's why they easily made short work of him, the unwitting political fall guy, when they needed all of us to "look over there" while Hillary wanted us to look at her (nooooooooooo!!!!!!).

Dear reader(s), some of you may hypothesize that Eliot Spitzer is in fact a shrewd foe. If you're right, my hat is off to you, for Spitzer's machinations would then put Ferraro's to shame. Only time will tell. Let me know if Spitzer reemerges, Phoenix-like, from the ashes to spit his jive another day -- say, to serve as Obama's attorney general.

(Next time: How all three campaigns and others have tried to use these developments to their advantage.)

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Because she's female, because he's black

Why is it that we who support neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama must be sexist misogynists or racist bigots? It's their policies (and her character) we disdain, not their gender or skin color. They could be as white as that Albino guitarist from the '70s; it wouldn't make the least bit of difference.

Thursday, December 13, 2007

I am a fundametalist

That's right -- without the "n."

What? What's that? Oh, I'm sorry. Got nothing to say?

Of course you don't.

Led Zeppelin has silenced the naysayers. Cookie Monster metal bands et al., take note:

You've. Been. Owned.

Jimmy Page and friends have just shown y'all why metal has heavy in front of it.

And while you and others have all meandered into your derivative sects and denominations of this genre, I, and the Zeppelin fans who stand with me, remain true to its fundametalist roots.

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Please, please...make it stop

"What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender. It was the same at the battle of Tet. You defeated us. We knew it. We thought you knew it. But we were elated to notice that your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefield. We were ready to surrender. You had won."

-General Giap of the North Vietnamese Army, writing in his recently published memoirs

Friday, July 13, 2007


These past two weeks I've delved heavily into an insane workout regiment billed as P90X. Up until today, the workouts have generally left me feeling uplifted and with a positive view of the program. But this morning's one-and-a-half-hour yoga workout left me angrier than a junkyard dog. I completed less than half an hour of the routine before shutting off the DVD player in a fit of rage that genuinely scared my wife.

I've heard that yoga has the potential to conjure deep-seated, deeply felt anger in some who practice the exercise. I guess I'm one of those people. Somewhere, deep down, I must be supremely angry about something. I wish I could figure out exactly what that is.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Race Pimps

I have routinely listened to Don Imus' radio program. He does many good things. He is a fair-minded, intelligent host with intelligent guests and listeners. For many years, he has headed multiple charities for children. Just about everyone who is anyone in Washington, D.C., has been a guest of his. Words that have exited their mouths while speaking through Imus' live microphone would surprise many.

These and other facts about Don Imus and his broadcasts make the mass exodus of advertisers and longtime, repeat guests of distinction all the more ridiculous. The reaction is way out of proportion to the offense. But what makes this a true outrage is the people leading the charge: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, two men who are nothing more than shameless shakedown artists, racial pimps whose hypocrisy is self evident to any citizen of this country engaged enough to perform a simple Web search on these scoundrels.

If I were a black man, I would lead the charge to renounce these losers' putative leadership, nothing more than a cover for their cheap public relations machinations. Let's get some genuine black leaders and kick these shysters to curb.

UPDATE: As of 5:30 p.m. EST, Don Imus has lost not only the television simulcast from MSNBC studios of his radio program, but the radio show, too. I wish Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton godspeed on their next vigils at the doorsteps of Def Jam Recordings and other rap producers' headquarters, where powerful people sanction the labeling of black women as "hos" every day of the week.