The 10,000th Pundit

Bad Headline

2004-11-29T18:38:00.000-08:00

Could somebody please explain to me how the inclusion of the word "Hmong" adds anything to the headline below?

In a similar vein, I'd like to suggest a few new story ideas to the fine folks at Reuters:
- Jewish Banker Raids Trust Fund
- Black Gangster Kills in Drive-By
- Asian Kid Gets 1440 on SATs

God, the media suck.

And it seems not a moment too soon . . .

2004-11-02T07:02:00.000-08:00

I guess I have to post today, just so people can see the time and day of the post, knowing that I made my prediction. Voter turnout will be enormous. The popular vote will be close, but Kerry will have a substantial electoral win.

Rectally Endowed

2004-10-04T13:09:00.000-07:00

I've read skeins of bloggists offer armchair advice to the Kerry campaign. I suppose up until the debate last Thursday, they had reason to do so, since that campaign didn't seem to be doing anything right. Opinions are indeed like assholes, in that everybody has one. In recognition of the fact that I, too, have an asshole, I offer a commercial idea to the Kerry campaign, in continuation of my during-debate post noting Bush's comment about Poland. (Jon Stewart commented on it too, so I'm in good company.)

Narrator: John Kerry has a detailed, four-point plan to withdraw American troops from Iraq. He will build a true coalition of nations that will ease the burden on American troops and American taxpayers. The best George Bush could do was get England and Australia to join his misadventure.

Cut to clip George Bush at the debate: Well, actually, he forgot Poland!

Narrator: Whoops, my mistake. We're certain to win the war now.

Caption: American casualties in Bush's war consitute 90% of the so-called "coalition" casualties. Americans bear 90% of the costs.

This commercial might lose some of the Polish-American votes and could even be regarded as chauvinistic. Given the Republicans' penchant for insulting France and history of Willie Horton ads, however, I don't see this as a problem. We need to sink down to their level.

Debate #1 - Live Action Update ("We got Poland!")

2004-09-30T18:54:00.000-07:00

I can't possibly see how they could spin this as a debate victory for Bush. He looks absolutely awful, stumbling, and not statesmanlike. Kerry is concise and articulate. But the spinmeisters have proven me wrong before.

Primary Blues

2004-09-13T22:55:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow is Primary Election Day in Minnesota. Unfortunately, the only seats up for election where I live are for President, U.S. Representative, and State Representative. There is also a judicial race in which the candidates consist of a handful of unknowns. You can vote with whichever party you like, but you then have to vote for a candidate of that party for each office. There is a depressing dearth of interesting races in my area:

President: I don't even know how the presidential primary vote works, or even if we have one. Minnesota uses a caucus system to pick the party nominee. I'm not sure if the primary serves a purpose in the presidential race.

Congress: My Member of Congress is Martin Olav Sabo, a throwback to the halcyon days when the Fifth Congressional District consisted exclusively of Minneapolis, and Minneapolis consisted entirely of Scandinavian Luthernas. It was not unlike the era which was portrayed somewhat anachronistically in Fargo. Nobody had heard of the Hmong, and maybe fifty residents were able to find Somalia on a map. A few African-Americans may have been trickling in from Chicago and points southwards, but this did not portend a substantial demographic shift. Mr. Sabo is a good Congressman, in spite of his aloof and uncharismatic Norwegian nature. He is super liberal and brings home the bacon -- thanks largely to a cushy position on the House Appropriations Committee.

He is opposed in the primary this year by Dick Franson. Mr. Franson served on the Minneapolis City Council in the 1960s, but has subsequently been relegated to "perennial candidate" status. I find dodecalosers like Mr. Franson to be sympathetic characters, imagining them to be deluded yet loveable political aspirants who lack the financial resources, charisma, and/or depth of knowledge to win an important election. I imagine that they would be portrayed in a film by William H. Macy. An alternate explanation for their lack of electoral success might be that their schizophrenic or sociopathic personalities present insurmountable obstacles to a democratic victory. Regardless, I would consider voting for them in a race where I know it wouldn't matter.

Mr. Franson, however, has done his best to make voting for him an unpleasant task. The Sun Newspaper reports that Franson bills himself as a "conservative Democrat" who feels "national security is our number one priority" and has endorsed President George W. Bush for re-election. "Some of my goals will be to lower the unemployment rate and establish a flat rate income tax, as well as rebuild the country’s infrastructure," Franson said. Way to kill the natural sympathy I would otherwise feel for a perennial candidate, Dicky-boy.

There's also a Green Party candidate and a Republican candidate in this seat but honestly: who cares? They'll lose.

State Representative: Here, too, I live in a safe Democratic seat. Both Democratic incumbent (who is doing a good job) and patsy Republican are unopposed in their repsective primaries. No minor party candidates have joined the fray. (I realize the Green and Independence Parties are technically major parties, but the Greens will lose this status this year (mercifully), with the Independences not far behind them.)

Judicial Race: Who cares? You can read about the candidates for this seat at http://www.minnlawyer.com/, and I did so, but I can only read sentences like "[a] judge must fairly and impartially apply the law to the facts of each case, without regard to the judge’s personal opinions" so many times before I want to vomit. I'm actually glad the Republicans were able to overturn the state law which said that judicial candidates couldn't express any opinions during a campaign. (The U.S. Supreme Court, led by Scalia, invalidated the law, correctly holding it to be an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of speech.) What's the point in having an election if the voters don't know where any of the candidates stand? I think I'll vote for Susan Burke, because she appears to be cute in her photo. I'll overlook probable nepotism and the aforementioned treacle-like quote about judicial impartiality because she's a babe. This race would have been interesting if incumbent Harvey Ginsberg had opted to run for reelection. Unfortunately, I guess he figured he didn't have much of a chance, most likely because of his peculiar affinity for smacking children in public.

Analysis: In short, there's nothing worth voting for in this year's primary election. At the very least, I wish I could cast a protest vote, a sympathy vote, or engage in partisan trickery. If I may elaborate:

Protest Vote: In 2002, I refused to vote for the Democrats' gubernatorial nominee in the primary. They picked as their nominee Roger Moe, an uninspiring white male political lifer, who probably would have been a good governor, but was a terrible choice for candidate. They had the option of picking two strong female candidates, but showed them out the door -- you know, the one underneath the glass ceiling. Instead, I voted for Ole Savior (how cool a name is that?!), another perennial candidate, but one for whom I knew of no political views that made my stomach turn, as do Mr. Franson's.

Sympathy Vote: Ole Savior may also have fit this category, assuming his views were somewhat aligned with mine. (Okay, I confess that I didn't thoroughly research his views before voting for him.) Other sympathy candidates might be an early 90s Harold Stassen. They're like retarded kids who ran for class president. Not voting for them would clearly demonstrate one's utter lack of a soul. Dick Franson doesn't qualify because of his inexplicable right-wing views.

Partisan Trickery: This would have been more fun than casting a mere protest or sympathy vote. Take, for example, the mess in the Fourth Congressional District. The incumbent there, Rep. Betty McCollum, is in what should be a safe Democratic district. She is the only Democrat running in the primary, but she faces a potential party split in the general election. Peter Vento, son of former Democratic Congressman Bruce Vento, is running in the Independence Party primary. Presumably, he would draw Democratic votes away from McCollum. One possibility of partisan trickery would be to vote in the Independence Party primary for the other guy (Bob Cardinal, a nobody).

But the real fun lies in the Republican field. One candidate is a serious one. She is a Ramsey County commissioner who will benefit if there is a Democratic split and maybe even sneak into Congress through the back door. The other candidate is Jack Shepard, who was recently revealed to have been convicted for sexual assault and to be a fugitive from the law (stemming from an arson charge) who is living in Italy. What fun it would be to vote for him, assuring McCollum that she has nothing to fear from the Republican ranks!

Conclusion: Alas, none of these three possibilities are meant to be. I will go and cast meaningless votes in a meaningless primary election solely to keep my voting streak alive. For this reason, my Primary Color is the Primary Blues.

Postscript: I promise to stay away from punchlines in future posts.

A good example of "Fair and Balanced"

2004-09-13T15:28:00.000-07:00

FAUX News has outdone itself. Its article about the race between Mark Kennedy and Patty Wetterling (probably the only competitive congressional race in Minnesota this year) is actually written somewhat obejctively. But you certainly wouldn't know that from the headline "Rep. Kennedy Backers: Opponent Nice, Uninformed," available at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132169,00.html.

The article actually does a good job of presenting the pros and cons of each candidate. So one would think that the headline would convey both sides as well to more accurately reflect the story. For example, it could read "Wetterling Draws Mixed Reviews." But no, they opt for presenting only the view of Kennedy's lackeys. To add insult to injury, they don't even mention Patty Wetterling by name -- she is merely competent Representative Mark Kennedy's naive opponent.

Thus, I issue a call to arms. O, mighty Blogosphere! I call on thee to initiate a Holy War against the heartless scribes at FOX News, a jihad against the infidel Murdoch-clones, a crusade against these doofuses! Summon forth thy ministers of erudition, those who shall preach the l33tspeak gospel to b0rken-hearted Democrats throughout Minnesota’s Sixth Congressional District! Let thy pundits and bloggers and diarists unleash a verbal torrent such that Proust shall be criticized for his brevity! Let the next 50 days be an unyielding torrent of words and verbal snipes to make them so ashamed that their headlines shall henceforth be objective!

Now go forth and sin no more.

Postscript

I can’t believe residents of any part of Minnesota elected this guy. The article notes that Kennedy “said many of his constituents inhabit the ‘exurbs’ — the neighborhoods beyond the suburbs — and they consider themselves independent and ‘more freedom-loving.’” Clearly, residents of the liberal, Jesus-hating Fifth Congressional District such as myself hate freedom.

Now if somebody does something I don’t like, I will sometimes ask them “Why do you hate freedom?” Or, if the mood strikes me, I will say something like “if you don’t let me nibble on your Awesome Blossom, the terrorists will have won.” I say these things in blissful temporary forgetfulness of the fact that there are actually jingoistic weirdos like Mark Kennedy who actually imply that those who don’t agree with him have an actual aversion to freedom. No more shall I let the occasional use of irony cause me to overrate the rhetorical competence of Bush lackeys like Mark Kennedy.

To make matters worse, Kennedy presumably has a cadre of high-priced Capitol Hill photographers at his disposal, and yet he chooses to send this photo to news outlets:

That photo contains so much to marvel at: the vacant, slightly misaligned eyes; the sallow, pasty complexion, undoubtedly stemming from too much time spent at lush Capitol Hill receptions thrown by the securities industry under fluorescent lights; the unformed smile, vaguely suggestive of a life of mouth-breathing. One can only imagine the American flag lapel pin just inches under the photo's cutoff point. Indeed, it's amazing that didn't make it into the final edit, to demonstrate his manly patriotism. Granted, it is a patriotism that would encompass putting neither him nor the issue of his loins into harm's way in a backwater nation like Afghanistan or Iraq. But I assure you, it is a manly patriotism nonetheless.

God, I hope this guy loses.

Bloggone It: Ironic Self-Reflection on 9/11

2004-09-11T16:23:00.000-07:00

Why did I start this blog? The blog is quite possibly the most vain, narcissistic, and masturbatory medium known to humanity. (Even now, I have delusions that my legions of faithful readers will simply love that chain of nearly synonymous adjectives.) What makes bloggers think anyone else in the world is interested in their take on the world, their views of politics, their dissertations on the Darfur crisis?

Perhaps we emulate what we see. The other day, I was trying to kill my boredom through masochism: I was listening to Bill O'Reilly's radio show. Now I know that as the good liberal that I am, I'm supposed to hate his guts. But I've never listened to him before. I don't know anything about him. I don't really care about him. Yet he was going on an on, expounding about himself, talking about why people don't like him, and boring me to tears in a span of 45 seconds. His monologue presupposed that everyone listening to him already knew everything about him. For people who do know all about him, perhaps it is indeed engrossing listening. Unfortunately, I was not so lucky.

Or perhaps the same primal urges that cause Bill O'Reilly to talk ad nauseum about himself drive your average blogger to expound endlessly about himself. (I'm eschewing gender neutrality in pronouns in acknolwedgement that punditry is better suited toward masculine characteristics, to the credit of women worldwide -- Ann Coulter notwithstanding.) By golly, if people are interested in what Bill O'Reilly has to say, they will surely be interested in what I have to say!

Or perhaps this phenomenon cannot be unique to the 21st Cenutry. Since time immemorial, men have wanted to write the Great American Novel. (I realize that sentence is chauvinistic on many levels. I assure you the liberal guilt will kick in eventually and I'll regret my choice of words later, but please let me get carried away for now.) No matter how dreary our lives, how insipid our prose, how hackneyed our metaphors, how fruitful our cliches, we all suffer from an inexplicable abundance of confidence that we merely have not yet found our right audience.

On this anniversary of great tragedy, I call on this Nation to be Silent. Shareth not your thoughts with thy neighbors. Expoundeth not on the state of the world. Thy circumlocution shall be thy bane.

Imagine there's no pundits,
It's easy if you try.
The pen of Rush Limbaugh
has blessedly run dry.

Thank you all for listening, and please remember to join me tomorrow as I share my thoughts on the reimportation of prescription drugs.

2004-09-09T17:38:00.000-07:00

Lately, I've noticed the abundance of stories like the one below, that claim to poll other countries to see who their people would prefer as American president. I'm sick of these stories, mainly because of their utter pointlessness. I mean, who cares? First of all, they won't be voting for American president, so at best they're utterly irrelevant. Second, it's completely obvious. Other countries tend not to look favorably upon arrogant superpowers. I think the only purpose of these stories is to give hopelessly desperate Bush haters something they can point to. (I'm a desperate Bush hater myself, but possibly not hopelessly so.) See, Kerry's campaign is making progress somewhere! This overlooks the point. The only way he'll win is by getting as dirty as the Republicans. This will involve attacking Bush's (lack of a) record as president, lack or a military record, and lack of principles. It sounds like he's starting to get aggressive -- here's hoping it's not too late.

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&month=September2004&file=World_News2004090923848.xml
("30 of 35 countries in survey prefer Kerry Friday, September 10, 2004-->")

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040909/ts_alt_afp/us_vote_poll_bush_kerry_040909150908
("Majority of Asians prefer Kerry than Bush: survey")

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3640754.stm
("World 'wants Kerry as president'")