The Secret History of Mitt "Rasta" Romney

Mitt Romney recently announced that he would, if elected, donate his presidential salary to charity. Presidents make about $400k each year these days, but compared to Romney's own personal wealth - estimated to be as much as a quarter of a billion - the POTUS paycheck is basically chump change. And, as a Mormon of course, Mitt already gives 10% back to the church.

This guy is too much.

Romney is just a little too poised, and as much as I hate to say it, a little too "good" for his own good. Of course we want ethical, service-oriented people for public office, folks who can be trusted to look after the security and general welfare of the nation. Ideally this is also a personable character, somebody with whom you could (hypothetically) chat over beers and cheeseburgers at the neighborhood picnic.

And politicians are all cut from a certain cloth. You notice this when you meet them in person - often they seem to have an almost pathological need for approval. They do possess charisma, and often large egos - but ones that are easily bruised due to their strange addiction to soliciting the affection of their constituents. And they can come across as a little plastic and fake.

But Romney is too much.

The best thing that could happen to a guy would be some kind of minor scandal - some lurid flaw that is revealed. Ideally not something too awful. And maybe it could even be manufactured by the campaign itself, to add one ruffled edge to Romney's otherwise pristine moral appearance.

Here's my suggestion: Hire some operatives who are world-class experts in Photoshop image alterations. Find an old photograph of a group of Rastafarians, say, at a reggae sun splash in the late 1970s, hanging out backstage, for example. Make sure there is a haze of ganja smoke in the air, and visible paraphernalia. Then Photoshop an image of a young Mitt Romney, wearing sideburns and beady necklaces, into the background, with a slightly glazed expression.

Then, deliberately leak this to some reporter.

The press will go berserk - they have an almost pathological craving for the hypocrisy of any conservative. But since the scandal is more suggestive, and nothing too serious, I'm willing to bet that a carefully managed response from the Romney camp - acknowledging youthful indiscretions - will actually gain more supporters than are lost. The net result will be that the too-plastic, too-perfect, sorta-creepy Romney image is eradicated, and we'll feel like we have a real guy on our hands, one who might even get our vote.

Tags: Mitt Romney

The Ice Cream Shooting

All 35 witnesses, according to the Enquirer, support the version of events put forward by the police: Qayyim Moore began shooting at cops with a .22 handgun after they first tried to talk to him about some ice cream that had allegedly been stolen from a convenience mart. Nineteen bullets later, following a foot chase, Moore was dead, and people are wondering how such a senseless tragedy could take place.

At Cincinnati Blog, Brian Griffin is wondering why no local bloggers have anything to say.

Well, what can you say? I suppose it's possible - with a great deal of distortion - to turn this into some kind of racial issue, with the cops playing the role of goose-stepping fascists. But that would require a mind-altering amount of dis ingenuousness given the aforementioned facts of the case, as they are currently known. When the cops want to talk, and you run away and begin shooting at them - nobody should be surprised when they shoot back, regardless of the pigmentation or cultural heritage of any of the participants in the transaction.

The more staggering issue, of course - is why this happened in the first place. There is a possibility that Mr. Moore had mental problems, and an autopsy will determine if drugs were involved. If that turns out to be the case the total uselessness of his death won't be ameliorated; but knowing that mental illness was a factor will be slightly better than chalking this up yet again to the ultra-violent nihilism that is the product of socially incohesive, daddy-free poverty - a problem often seen in neighborhoods like Price Hill - and one which few people are willing to acknowledge, much less address with any compassion or intelligence.

We have become comfortably numb.

The Amenities of the Neighborhood

Living in a city neighborhood like mine there are certain amenities.

When the car's brakes began to make a curious rubbing noise a day or two ago, it was time to bring it into the shop. Mrs. Spacetropic was busy at the estate, so I decided to drop off the car after work yesterday, and walk the few blocks home. Since we'd be needing the baby stroller, I removed that from the vehicle at the repair shop and pushed it along with my laptop bag where the baby would otherwise be.

It did occur to me that I looked kinda nuts, to passing cars or fellow pedestrians. But nature has a way of signaling "stay away from the insane creature", and I'm at the age where I care less and less what others think. (Likewise, I may choose to wear lime green pants in my advanced years. That's my prerogative.)

But the amenities are twofold. First, the repair shop is one of those rarest of blessings on Earth, a bunch of honest auto mechanics who charge a fair price. Repairs are regularly about half to one-third of what I would expect at a franchise garage, and conversely, if they ever told me it would take $1200 to fix the neutron discombobulator on the family sedan - I would trust explicitly that every dollar for parts and labor was correct and fair.

(I'm deliberately not giving out their name. And they hardly need more business.)

Second, I walked the kids to school, pushing the baby in the aforementioned stroller along on this late-May morning, seeing a few neighbors. It's a small thing really, and there are plenty of ways to live, but I'm not sure how the past 24 hours would have been managed if I lived in a subdevelopment in the exurban tundra, where a vehicle and cheap gasoline is required for every transaction and contingency.

Bloggers Block (Miscallany)

Not, strictly speaking, the inability to write, but more the fact that nothing out there seems worthy of a full-blown post; that's what's holding me back. So ... a few fragments, just to keep the operation moving:

• On my nightstand: Big Sur and the Oranges of Hieronymus Bosch by Henry Miller. Reflections on the artist and the notion of an 'art colony' from a writer at the height of his power and maturity. During college I read all of the usual Miller, but he's much more than the Tropics.
• Listening: Dan Deacon's Spiderman of the Rings. The kids (in Baltimore, anyway) are alright. Bona fide inventive music is still being made by artists aligned with the grand traditions of fluxus and surrealism! Hurrah. It's not for everybody, probably - but tracks like the anthemic 'Wham City', his tribute to the (speaking of colonies) art collective from whence he sprang - seem to suggestively hint at Mr. Deacon's untapped capacity to alter conventional ideas of modern music. Here's hoping.
• Er ... on the political side, the run-up to the election is dull as toast right now, save for the Romney-McCain sparring.
• On the legislative side - zowie, did everybody misjudge the public on immigration, or what? The difference between the D.C. elites and the general public on this issue is amazing.

That's about it. Last but not least - check out some of the pictures and posts, of late, on my sister's blog from Haiti, Inside the Frame.

Cincinnati's Citywide Wireless Scheme

As a conservative, I should summon a righteous indignation at the fact that Cincinnati is contemplating a free wireless network, which would be paid for, in all likelihood, with the proverbial taxpayer buck. As a geek, and as one of half a dozen taxpaying conservatives who haven't yet evacuated to Warren or Butler Counties, I am, as the thundering liberal malcontents always say in their defense, uniquely "entitled to my opinion" on this issue.

Free wireless types of efforts are usually better served by the free market, where consumers have the benefit of prices that are driven downward by competition. And yes, government always makes a mess of things, and we need to be mindful of the ever-creeping concept of entitlements when big brother gets involved. Food stamps, welfare, prescription drugs, now wireless access - I feel owed a fresh new laptop and an HDTV.

Oh, wait. All joking aside, Cincinnati mayor Mark Mallory is already suggesting that free computers for the downtrodden should be part of the bargain. Sheesh. You need to get up pretty early in the morning to move quicker than Democratic politicians offering new and more generous handouts.

The real losers in a city-wide wireless scheme will be Cincinnati Bell, T-Mobile, and all of the other carriers that attempt to charge you $9.95 an hour (or $19.95 a month) for the pleasure of using one of their access points. They built their infrastructure - heck, it cost almost a hundred bucks to install that wireless router at the bagel shop - and now they're going to get screwed. (Unless of course they win the city contract, in which case their margins will be even fatter.)

What makes me less than indignant (compared to some others) is the sense that the Internet is a net societal positive unlike any other. It has become the lifeblood of commerce and culture for the Western world. We should pay for quality access (speed mostly, and reliability) - but simple access almost seems like a "given". A wireless citywide network seems like a simple upgrade from offering PCs at the library - and you can argue against that too on the grounds of overgenerous government munificence, but we've really collectively settled the debate that libraries are paid for on the public dime.

If this can be done relatively cheaply, if the city can execute a plan efficiently and without years of dickering around, it could be a "win" for a local government that has reached an almost legendary level of ineptitude. The odds are long - but let's see how this shapes up before knocking it down completely.

GOP Debate No. 2 - Some Reaction

Ron Paul’s snowball’s chance in hell of winning the Republican nomination melted into a puddle last night, thanks to Rudy, and if he has any sense he’ll tell his deluded campaign staffers to return home to their families. There’s already a group of folks who believe that America has justly earned its share of belligerence and resentment, that apple pie “deserves it” – and this group finds a more suitable home in the Democrat party, left side of the tent. After Mr. Paul’s gaffe he deserves little more than a wikipedia entry in history. Adios, champ.

Rudy had his moment, but continued to get his knickers in a twist about abortion. Anyone who stakes out a pragmatic position on a hot-button issue risks the possibility of being upended by principle. I’m against abortion personally too, but recognize that a massive change right now is, at the very least, problematic. Anyone in this camp runs the risk of sounding like “slavery is wrong, but let the states decide”. Rudy should settle on some key rhetoric that explains his position in the best manner possible, and deflect or ignore further questions as “asked and answered”.

McCain is sounding tired. He should never utter the “drunken sailor” line ever again, especially after getting one-upped by Huckabee (who I still weirdly like) with his zinger about Edwards in a hair salon.

Also, McCain’s nuance on interrogation is a principled stand that cuts the other way. After having talked to many Americans – even a staggering number of folks who vote Blue every election - I think that I’m in complete agreement with the majority. We really don’t want to live in a country that routinely interrogates the most repugnant, qualified offender in extremely unpleasant ways. We want the moral high ground, but in an asymmetric conflict of attrition we may have to settle, in very rare scenarios, with doing whatever it takes to prevent catastrophic loss of life.

Keywords: “Very rarely” and “whatever it takes”. Again, this can be easily (and irresponsibly) extrapolated with hype into beating the nose-ringed hippie at the bookstore because we (whoops) fell down a slippery slope to fascism and now everybody’s burning Huck Finn. But this is hyper-reactionary hysteria, and we must believe that our government, categorically, is functionally incapable of systematic excesses, regardless of which political party is in power.

In other news, Fred's looking better to me.

Christians and Creationism

A new museum is set to open in Northern Kentucky later this month, one dedicated to the prospect that the universe was created about six thousand years ago, over the course of six days.

This belief implies that thousands of well-intentioned scientists over the course of history have apparently been deluded by the evidence. How did that happen? Was it because of some elaborate conspiracy? This would be remarkable, considering how many of them were Christians. Did it happen because the creator, perhaps as a prank, deceptively decided to make the world seem much older - to the tune of billions of years?

Needless to say, both prospects seem far-fetched. And this is, of course, a hard issue on which to find any middle ground. The most vocal critics of the creationists are usually the most bitter atheists, folks who respond to the excesses of religious fervor by showing a fanatical intolerance for any notion of faith whatsoever.

In practical terms it means the stern anti-creationists specifically loathe the Christians, of course. They are a more convenient target, and they can be criticized from within generous confines of a liberal Western democracy. It would be amusing to watch the devout rationalists attempt to rationalize their way out of a Wahabi school, if they were dropped into rural Saudi Arabia. I imagine their mocking tone would evaporate very quickly as they adopted the most respectful PC attitude, and they might miss the Jesus folks of Kentucky in comparison.

There are moderates - people who believe that the universe is more than an accidental collision of particles, and that life is more than a sequence of amino acids - although it may be those things too. For people in this silent but large population, a literalist interpretation of the bible seems too strange. But they also recognize that even in this strict fundamentalist dogma there are elements of their own faith, one based on compassion and redemption.

After all, Christianity demands something very radical, almost embarrassing: Love towards all, creationist and agnostic alike.

Redmond's Lawyers Ride Again

Apple. Open source software. The faint knowledge that, with the possible exception of Excel, pretty much everything your company has ever done has been derivative of other's efforts, whether it's a direct copy, or innovation at the margins. And the developer community really doesn't like you. Even the Europeans are busting your chops.

Man, it's hard for Microsoft.

So they're going after the open source movement on the basis of two hundred cases of patent infringement - cases where some quirk or feature of the software was, they say, invented by Microsoft first. Paul McDougall, blogging for InfoWeek, observes:

What choice does Microsoft have? It's basically lost the Internet to Google. If Linux and other free software continues its march toward mainstream (don't underestimate the significance of Dell's decision to ship Ubuntu Linux for the desktop) what's left for the company?

And I'm not a lawyer, but I've heard in many places that American patent law, which matured for years in the material world of "stuff", is woefully inadequate when it comes to the bizarre digital world of software. The flow of information and interaction with the user can be abstracted into so many obtuse subcomponents that it takes a special kind of expertise to really understand the territory. Few brains are given to both dexterity with the law and an intimate understanding of the subtle mysteries of a low-level API.

Curious that no information has been released yet about which of Microsoft's specific patents have been infringed. Once this information goes public I suspect the open source community will respond so vigorously - identifying the various non-Microsoft pedigree of the software element in question, and even re-coding when necessary - that the brigade of attorneys from Redmond will be quickly overwhelmed.

Be very careful before going to war with a distributed, resilient system.

The Holocaust and PC Doctrine

Political Correctness 1.0: Teaching the Holocaust in schools is a painful but vital part of liberal education. It illustrates, in horrifying terms, what becomes possible when one group of people is treated, at the hands of a totalitarian government, without essential compassion and dignity, what happens when hate becomes a doctrine of a centralized state.

Political Correctness 2.0: There are certain groups of people who become offended and upset at the mention of the Holocaust. They have even raised questions about whether or not the Holocaust was a real historical episode. The people in these groups have some claim to status as a marginalized cultural minority, so to respect their wishes, the Holocaust will not be taught in schools.

England recently upgraded.

Semantics aside, the original, "classic" version of political correctness - which might also be described as fundamental decency and respect for one another, combined with a watchful awareness of the evil possibilities of ethnic hatred - is actually not a bad idea whatsoever.

The re-vamped version is what happens when societies are held hostage by an all-consuming need for cultural harmony at all possible cost, combined with a crippling moral relativism that prevents them from rationally discerning how one tradition may be objectively, logically better and true compared to another.

For example, Nazis. There's a bunch of political systems that are totally and without qualification better than Nazis.

Sihn o' the Times

There's a petition out there - intended to be presented to the California Governator, to have Paris Hilton's 45-day jail sentence dismissed. The effervescent heiress herself has added her endorsement:

The original petition had already received more than 900 signatures by Tuesday morning after Paris wrote on her MySpace page: "My friend Joshua started this petition, please help and sihn [sic] it."

"I urge all fans and supporters and all that are outraged by injustice to sign this petition."

Injustice? Outrage?

Thanks, but I'll save my outrage for, let's say, the people who suffer at the hands of kleptocratic governments in Africa; or perhaps the Iranian students who face a jail sentence for blogging, or having a Western haircut - not some wealthy, brainless dink who can't be bothered to observe some very simple civic obligations. And what's more, her sentence should be increased on the grounds that anyone worth over a million dollars should be constitutionally required to spell the language correctly.

Thankfully there's already a counter-petition out there (you gotta love the Internet) to request specifically that Hilton serve her time just like anybody else. Schwarzenegger, do the right thing and make sure this foolish person spends a few days in jail.

O.J. Simpson Demands His Right to Racism

Let's collectively agree to retire the universal, all-purpose use of "racism" to explain anything unfair that happens to any African-American, anywhere, at any time. Perhaps - and I realize this is a radical idea - we can apply the notion of "racism" when people are treated unfairly because of their race.

By all accounts Jeff Ruby had a restaurant filled with people of all different racial and cultural backgrounds on the day of the Kentucky Derby. What he didn't have - and didn't want - was convicted criminals sitting at his tables. And therefore O.J. Simpson and his "entourage" were asked politely to leave. Mr. Ruby certainly didn't eject Michael Jordan - who happened to be the customer to take O.J.'s vacated table following the incident.

According to Mr. Ruby he rejected Mr. Simpson's patronage out of respect for the Goldman and Brown families - who, let's not forget, won the civil case hands down. He's been tried and found guilty - and he remains one of the most despicable characters in America. The whole freaking restaurant began clapping when he left.

Let's be really clear: For O.J. Simpson to call this incident "racism" is an affront to honest people who are truly denied rights and services because some ignoramus can't look past the fact they are African-American. Just like the Duke lacrosse case it's a sick, self-serving distortion of a very serious charge. No justice-loving American should tolerate it's misuse.

Tags: Racism, O.J. Simpson, Jeff Ruby

Hezbollah In Paraguay And Civic Fail-Over

Fresh on the heels of the Albanian freelancers who planned a terror strike on Fort Dix we discover that Hezbollah is opening a branch office in the hinterlands of Paraguay.

It's a matter of globalization and co-branding. Anytime you've got a barely-functioning, economically-depressed, non-democratic nation state with a large population of radicalized Muslims you have the opportunity to recruit angry jihadists to your cause. It could be suburban New Jersey, it could be South America. Suddenly Al Qaeda looks comparatively like the Austro-Hungarian Empire: These new groups are not your father's decentralized terror networks.

The smartest minds are trying to understand this trend. Ed Cone thinks this intensely localized phenomenon will increase the likelihood of biological and infrastructure attacks from all kinds of groups - not just traditional Islamofacists but drug cartels and isolated cranks - Seung-Hui Cho writ large. But the proper response to these kinds of threats isn't more and more government agencies with new and broader powers. According to a former DOD counter terrorism specialist (quoted in the Cone article):

Technology is a key template. "We need more resilience at the community level," says Robb. "Backup systems and alternative sources of supply. A bird flu epidemic could mean six months with nobody in the office -- are you set up for that kind of remote work?"

His advice: simplify and plan to route around problems. "We focus on economies of scale and reward specialization, but there's not a control system complex enough to manage the whole global system. You can dampen the shocks by simplifying your processes and planning to switch around as needed."

More centralization of government power is a road to ruin, he says. "We need a more resilient approach, that allows for more community participation in security, and more connectivity." Special ops forces, cooperation, and rapid response to threats are all critical as well.

Community-mindedness, independence, and resilience as a way to circumvent threats to security? Can we handle it? Many Americans have been conditioned to bray for big-government assistance after every disaster. Relocation expenses, low-interest loans and a credit card from FEMA are just a few of the amenities that become possible when the citizenry is afflicted with impersonal trauma. And how will Democratic lawmakers stay in business without speaking up sanctimoniously on behalf of the aggrieved?

Can't we just bomb Paraguay into sticks instead?

Tags: Terrorism, Security, Paraguay

Electoral Realignment and Strategy

The map is not the territory.
         - Alfred Korzybski

Anybody who watches elections with a careful eye should print out a copy of Mike Barone's The Realignment of America (from yesterday's WSJ) and tape it to the wall. He tracks the growth and shrinkage of urban areas throughout the country and folds this into a larger picture America.

Among the conclusions he draws - and we're talking numbers here, not rhetoric - is that many of the blue cities in the east and west are becoming two-tiered societies, comprised of a working immigrant class and a wealthier elite. Meanwhile there's a boom in many cities in the middle of the country - from Charlotte to Dallas to Houston there's a great deal of growth. This appears to be where the middle class has headed - away from the tony neighborhoods of San Francisco to the "inland coast". And these are the Red State voters, to a large extent. The Rust Belt that extends from the upper Midwest to Pennsylvania continues to lose people. But other cities - Cincinnati included - are holding their own, domestic outflow is matched by folks moving to town.

Each political party should update their gameplan accordingly. One of the reasons the Democrats lost Ohio (arm-waving about "election fraud" aside) is that they had outdated model of the counties in and around Cincinnati. This lesson should be applied adroitly. And more importantly, political messages should be tailored to fit these shifting constituencies, and here's where it gets tricky, and we have to depart the land of numbers for some broad generalities.

The bifurcated cities that Barone describes present a problem for Democrats to the extent that issues split differently between two groups. I suspect lower taxes and a strong national defense would be valued more by the "lower tier" of the Blue cities, while the social issues that so animate the "upper" class simply do not resonate. John Edwards, tell me, if you know, how you write a speech that has equal appeal to "both" Americas? Although I suppose this is hardly a new problem for the Democrats, seeing as it's always been a party comprised of various ethnic and cultural sub-groups. But strictly from a targeting standpoint, the GOP has an advantage in having a large economically-similar population amassed in these key Central/Southern districts.

The name of the game is "where people live" - not only in terms of population growth, but also in terms of how they see their problems in relation to those of the nation as a whole.

Tags: Michael Barone, 2008, Demographics

Crime In the City and the Burbs

Two crime stories, two different locations.

The first involved a semi-spectacular chase which ended in a flipped car and a suspect wanted for felony assault who was tasered, and taken into custody. The second involved two men who struck a woman from behind several times during a robbery in a mall parking lot - before making off with her daughter's "Hello Kitty" purse.

The first incident occurred in Kennedy Heights, a neighborhood of mixed income and cultural folks in the city of Cincinnati. The second incident occured in Florence Kentucky, one of the busy, more suburban areas that make up the greater Cincinnati area.

And, human psychology being what it is, the first incident will confirm, in the minds of many, all sorts of pre-existing assumptions about the "dangerous" nature of life in the city. The second incident - and every crime story that takes place in the outer areas of town will be mentally written off as an "isolated incident". Never mind the fact that crime in the outer areas is on the rise for no other reason than simple demographics. There are more people in these "donut" areas. Furthermore, law enforcement budget, like all sorts of other basic services, is several fiscal cycles behind in terms of basic capacity. This means more crime in sheer numbers.

But of course, crime in Kennedy Heights - of course! What did you expect from those people.

The Reactionary Hillary Machine

For some reason, the Hillary campaign feels compelled to respond the French election by drawing a distinction between Ségolène Royal and the Senator from New York.

"Other than the fact that they are both women, they don't have much in common," said Howard Wolfson, Clinton's communications director.

Are you kidding? Who was even making the comparison in the first place? I suppose it's of passing interest that both of them are ladies - but you'd have to have popcorn between your ears to imagine that Royal's failed shot at the French presidency reflects anything good or ill about Ms. Rodham. But of course, there's more. All things Clinton come with incessant spin:

Clinton advisers said that, if anything, Royal proved that a woman must run with a focus on her credentials. Clinton allies saw the race as evidence that the New York senator is running the right kind of campaign, a substantive one -- even if it means she is sometimes accused of lacking charisma.

"Hillary Clinton offers a very different kind of choice than the French faced," said Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist. "Hillary Clinton is well regarded as strong, smart and a leader. Her experience says she is ready to see the country through changes with a steady, substantive and sure hand."

Such assertions don't become true by virtue of their constant repetition. But the fact that these operatives cannont restrain themselves from postioning the matter of Hillary's gender signals the fact that, yes ma'am, it will be used constantly in the months ahead. Furthermore they infantalize the public by assuming that voters are incapable of looking past "identity" politics as strenuously defined by those on the Left.

This may get me in trouble, but I suspect the Republic would endure, and somehow stagger forward through history under the helm of Mr. Obama or (shudder) Mr. Edwards, although their party is certainly not my first choice. And objectively speaking the United States may be long overdue for a woman president. But Hillary Clinton is a lousy candidate on her own merits, regardless of her glands, and despite the reactionary spin of her hit squad of advisors.

Something tells me that will bear constant reapeating.

Tags: Hillary Clinton

IBM 25: Just A Part of History Receding

The indispensable Eddie Izzard does a very funny skit about the difference between European and American version of history ("We restored this Miami hotel to the way it looked over 50 years ago!"). It's a distinctly North American memory issue - we imagine that our abbreviated past extends out with as much breadth and importance as older cultures. England, for example, has real castles. I'm told.

This comes to mind when you read about the plan underway to demolish IBM's Building 25 in Silicon Valley to make way for a big box retailer. According to the Mercury News:

Building 25 is considered historically significant for research conducted on the flying-head disk drive, one of the most important technological inventions in Silicon Valley; for work done there by Reynold Johnson and the IBM Research Team; and for its California mid-century modern design, by renowned architect John Bolles.

Now, certainly the work done in this building had some degree of importance. And I'm in agreement, overall, that my nation does a lousy job in the aggregate of taking care of property. We build cheap structures which linger, vacant, long past their lifetimes because of a financial treatment on the backend - it cost more to tear them down. Other times when they're a greater economic value we rip down the past indiscriminately. (Right now some of the most scenic and history-laden harbors in Maine are being replaced with multi-million dollar condos.)

Nonetheless, let's pause for a few moments to note the irony. The terrific improvements in commercial information technology that were pioneered by a company like IBM (in buildings like this one) have helped give rise to the manufacturing efficiencies, JIT inventory and cost management systems that enabled the rise of companies like WalMart and the other big boxers. Now, in terms of prime California real estate, it's come back around the other way.

Because Unrestrained Socialism Is A Fantastically Bad Idea

With a staggering 85% turnout at the polls, France has elected a slightly right-of-center president, Nicolas Sarkozy.

It's a clear victory for the general idea that cradle-to-grave socialism - combined with an immigration policy that amounts to helpless appeasement of ultra-extreme "multiculturalism" - might be a lousy idea in the long haul as a way to preserve the country the Frenchmen claim to adore. And according to the AP Sarkozy really won the deep demographics in this election - 49% of blue collar folks, and even 32% of the crowd that normally votes Green. Zut alors!

The French aren't stupid. Somewhere it must be clicking, somehow they must know - the combined picture simply cannot work: A thirty-five hour work week, in addition to workers "rights" that amount to the guarantee that nobody can be fired, in addition to astonishingly generous social programs - and a 10% unemployment rate - and even higher unemployment among the booming group of recent arrivals from fundamentalist countries who fully expect France to assimilate their values instead of the reverse.

Talk about unsustainability. (Hmm. Maybe that's what the Greens recognized.)

And as we contemplate that dizzying picture, let's not forget there are folks in the U.S. who would have us believe that anything less than a similar social arrangement in America is tantamount to oppressive fascism. They wrap in in the cloak of "Democracy Now!" - but it boils down to the same essential goals. And they - the same same group who promotes distorted notions of fairness and hearing "other voices" - will not refrain from calling you the worst kind of names if you don't agree.

But I digress.

Our once-and-a-while Gallic friends may have voted to acknowledge the problems, but it remains to be seen if they have the cheese necessary to make the appropriate changes. Prior to the election socialist Ségolene Royal predicted violent social unrest if Sarkozy won the presidency. Aside from the shameless fear-mongering, there may be some objective truth to this forecast. There appears to be a noisy layer of French society willing to take to the streets when their entitlements are threatened. In recent years it was young workers who were outraged at the possibility that they could be fired for poor performance. (Presumably they had to schedule their protest/riots on an evening when "youths" from North Africa and the Middle East didn't have any banlieue-burning planned.)


Mark Steyn takes this apart better than I possibly could - read the article. He also notes how market-friendly London is now home to an increasing large number of young Frenchmen and women (a population as high as half a million) - evidence that, although growth-minded French do exist, they may have already lit out for greener pastures.

Some cynicism seems warranted. But let's extend some credit too - and congratulations, for a once-great nation that has expressed an interest, with the most recent election, in pulling out of the downward spiral of moribund ultra-Leftism.

Tags: Sarkozy, French Election, Mark Steyn

Postgame Thoughts On the GOP "Debate"

Mostly I feel annoyed.

There are candidates in the field, and issues at stake in our national debate which deserve a more fair treatment than we witnessed last night. This is not to excuse some of the lackluster performances, notably from Giuliani and McCain. But the pointless drone of brisk questioning was calculated to oversimplify the participants' various platforms.

Let's be honest. Chris Matthews is an adnoidal shill for the Left-heavy and intensely cynical Chevy Chase class of politicos. Can you imagine a former Republican operative-turned-journalist hosting the Democratic debate? More importantly, were any of those infantile yes-or-no trap questions laid out for the Democrats? Do you want us to win or lose in Iraq Mr. Edwards? Mrs. Clinton? Do you support [graphic description of what takes place during partial birth abortion]? Yes or no?

It's impossible to imagine Brian Williams trying to really put the screws, last week, to anyone on the stage. The Democrats are questioned by their social peers, and any notion of tough journalism is a charade. Who wants an awkward moment the next time they have dinner at Martha's Vineyard?

One more thought: Fred Thompson looms large this morning. If he intends to join the fray the time might be ripe.

Liveblogging: The GOP Debate

7:17 PM - The time is drawing near for the Republican debate. The network du jour is MSNBC, chosen for it's slanty liberal goodness wrapped in a "What, c'mon we treat both sides equally!" shell. In the pre-game coverage they've been getting commentary from Bob Shrum, loser of elections par excellence.

7:31 PM - Really, Keith Olbermann is nonpartisan. No, seriously.

7:35 PM - Nancy enters with Ah-nold. A very California moment.

7:40 PM - The help keeps bringing me the Laphroaig when clearly I asked for the Talisker. Frustrating!

7:59 PM - Lots of discussion about Fred Thompson. And here we go ...

8:02 PM - Questions get to be submitted via Politico.com. Dynamic populism!

8:03 PM - Rudy: Spin the question back around to your talking points. A scattered effort.

8:05 PM - McCain: If we lost (according to Congressional Dems), then who won? Say it over and over again. People need to hear it that way.

8:08 PM Romney: A good answer on Iraq. Knowledgeable. Hope he didn't blow his big money answer.

8:11 PM - Huckabee is coming off well. Best of the little guys.

8:15 PM - Ron Paul = GOP Howard Dean (But does he have the rebel yell?)

8:18 PM - I'd like to hear more from Rudy. Also, I think the questions looking for a division with Bush are getting overplayed.

8:26 PM - There's a good reason why Rudy, McCain, and Romney are at the top of the pack.

8:30 PM - The correct answer on the "Roe v. Wade" question: It depends on what replaces it.

8:33 PM - Matthews goes after Rudy and lobs a softball at McCain.

8:37 PM - Hey Ron Paul, it's called asymmetrical warfare. You can't dodge it, and it's a real threat. The libertarian riff seems a little naive.

8:42 PM - None of these guys is drawing a contrast to the Democrats. This seems like a huge mistake. What they are saying about these issues would be so much more persuasive if they explained the Left's take on the same (for example security, religion, abortion).

8:46 PM - This is getting unfocused. I did like Tancredo's explanation of centrism versus Reagan-esque stand-by-your-guns principle.

8:53 PM - Abortion ad nauseum. Completely overdone. In a side by side comparison I am sure they didn't try half as hard to try and find issues that divide the Democrat field.

8:59 PM - Matthew lobs another litmus-test 'yes or nor' divisive issue - stem cells - that cannot be reduced to yes or no answers. Gonna catch him a GOP'er!

9:04 PM - Linkage to other blogs covering the debate at Instapundit.

9:10 PM - Another litmus red herring, a 'yes or no' about evolution. They don't want an extended answer for these, do they? But the Democrats are allowed to parse, and discuss nuance, and talk around shades of grey.

9:17 PM - A small percentage of these questions don't appear to be about abortion or Iraq. Perhaps there was some kind of mix-up during debate prep.

9:19 PM - While I appreciate the fact that Rudy worked so hard to reduce crime in NYC, I wonder if this isn't overdone. Also, isn't it a very different beast, being effective at the federal level?

9:20 PM - Thanks for the link, Mr. Glenn Reynolds!

9:21 PM - Scooter Libby is a no-starter, inside the Beltway issue, Matthews. (But it's another 'yes or no', of course.)

9:26 PM - Romney won colossal points with the base for being the first (to my knowledge) to mention Reid, Pelosi, and Hillary. Finally.

9:29 PM - This is a great question - what they would have done differently than Bush. But they are supposed to answer this in, what, 20 seconds?

9:30 PM - My thoughts, very early: Rudy lost ground, and suffered the most with his answers on questions related to social issues, especially abortion. Romney seemed unflappable, and if there was a winner, he was the guy. McCain held ground, thanks to Matthews, who has a soft spot for the maverick. Huckabee is the best of the little guys, but I hope Ron Paul survives a couple of rounds, just to add variety to the debate.

And now the post-game analysis begins ...

9:57 PM - According to the TV heads I've been surfing, my scoring seems to be in agreement with many observers. I do think, from having heard him in other forums, that Rudy is much better than this debate revealed, and Romney - well, who knows? He might be too slick, he might be the real McCoy. But certainly he'll attract more attention (and criticism) after this debate - especially on the Mormon angle.

GOP Debate: Pre-Game Analysis

It should be a good show tonight, this Republican debate. I hope to be liveblogging. In advance of the show I think it's helpful to identify the media templates and talking points that have been deployed. You can hear them bandied about in the coverage.

The shadow of Ronald Reagan, for example, is cited as very influential in the current field of candidates. True enough - many conservatives yearn for the effectiveness and oratory of a leader who defied the media and the opposition to claim a better place for America - one who left history a better place. And the debate is taking place at the Reagan library. But in practical terms this is bogus - of course each of the Republican contenders will fall short by this standard.

Another semi-fraudulent "template" is the George Bush situation. Chris Matthews can be expected to ask a number of breathless questions about whether or not the candidates support this unpopular war. If they do they're going against the "will of the American people" - and if they don't, they're being disloyal. What is missed here is that Americans want an effective leader in national defense, and they're happy to hear new ideas. George Bush isn't on the ticket next November.

(I actually think the front-runners, Giuliani and McCain may use the occasion of Matthews getting bull-doggish on this issue to knock one out of the park.)

The final canard involves social issues. The media loves to uncover the rich stank of hypocrisy wherever possible - so abortion, gay marriage and so forth will be punted repeatedly at the candidates, especially those with potential conflicts or non-conservative (by the media's definition) platforms. This may be revealing, once some of these issues get discussed on stage - but I expect each of the potential targets has all sorts of prepared answers, some of which may have an edge.

Let's hope for some positive and useful surprises.

Tags: GOP Debate, Ronald Reagan, Election

Imus hires lawyer in CBS firing: source - May. 2, 2007

Imus hires lawyer in CBS firing: source - May. 2, 2007

Obama's User-Created Campaign

That's twice the Obama effort has found itself somewhat clueless at the intersection of politics and the new and rapid Internet-driven culture. The problem here - for a campaign, and for that matter, businesses - is that any old schmuck enabled by the blazing efficiencies of mass communication can attract a phenomenal audience and appear to speak on behalf of the official source.

First this happened when some clever advertising person re-worked Apple's 1984 commercial to make it a scathing critique of Hillary Clinton - and secondarily, a plug for Obama. The campaign was sort of exasperated by this. On one hand it's too aggressively confrontational for this phase of the campaign. On the other hand it was brilliant, and everyone was talking about it - and Obama.

Now they're in a dust-up with MySpace over a user-created webpage that is the most active Obama page on the popular social networking site. This is a young, energetic demographic that you don't want to alienate - which the Republicans seem to have surrendered faster than Vichy France (along with the grassroots-building efficiencies of Web 2.0 - another column). Obama first tried to buy the MySpace page, but didn't want to pay the price. Now their treatment of the owner is exacting a greater price.

These candiates are all about controlling the message. It's a problem when third parties particpate so loudly and effectively in their effort to reach voters. What they don't understand, though, is that the same Internet that allows these things to happen also has a self-correcting mechanism. If the Apple/Hillary spot had been too vicious it would have never been played. If Joseph Anthony (the kid on MySpace) was prommoting Obama for all the wrong reasons (or with too much crude behavior) then it would be less popular.

When it comes to media message, the analogy of the cathedral and the bazaar applies. When you cede control to a motivated and dispersed democracy you allow for the possiblity of excesses and errors (which also happen inside the supposedly process-controlled cathedral). But you profit greatly from the creativity and energy.

Tags: Barack Obama, MySpace

Review: Neal Pollack's 'Alternadad' (Updated)

Once I found myself discussing the band Wilco with the father of one of my daughter's friends.

A couple of guys in their mid-30s, agreeing enthusiastically that "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" is indeed an amazing album. The scene was a camping trip for "dads and daughters" in rural Tennessee - three days of setting up tents, jumping off boats, and cooking meals that had been meticulously pre-arranged and packed into coolers by sensible spouses. The fathers, otherwise, might have been happy enough to enjoy meals that consisted entirely of Frito-Lay products - and prodigious amounts of beer, naturally.

And then the question: What other bands are you into? Nearby a clump of eleven year old girls built a house for a frog that had been caught. Others were attempting to help light the barbecue. Still others were trying to coax a girl away from a tent in which she had been hiding as a result of bruised feelings.

Broken Social Scene? Franz Ferdinand?

I think your daughter might be on fire.

I'm well-equipped to identify absurdity, and the ludicrousness of certain situations. What other band would we be discussing given our demographic - a couple of aging quasi-hipsters with a jones for alt-culture? Are those pretensions simply sad at a certain point, a clinging to shreds? Witness the old man moshing away in front of the stage, while the kids nearby recoil in laughter.

But I finally don't think so. I think the baby boomers dragged their counter-cultural pretensions so far into old age - they haven't stopped yet, really - they have so prepared the ground, that it's hardly that absurd to imagine Gen-X growing older, still opinionated (in some corners) about good music, non-mainstream movies, and culture that isn't entirely mass-marketed. And that's the crux of it - It becomes less a matter of "youth" culture than simply some choices that are beyond the event horizon of the expected cultural firmament. This can extend to many areas - where and how you choose to live, food (organic, local, international) - and the products with which we choose to populate our consumer lives.

So I can accept the basic premise of a dad who wants, for lack of a better word, to be cool. Neal Pollack expresses this repeatedly in Alternadad, to the point where he protests too much. Specifically, he wants his son to think of him (and all of the things he enjoys) as "cool" - and this is the part that starts to seem a little regressive and strange.

His book chronicles the journey he began to take with his wife when, instead of caring for pets, they indulged the need to procreate. Then they need to choose a place to live - ultimately selecting a tough neighborhood in the progressive city of Austin. Their son sounds like a sweet child, but one with some minor behavioral challenges - notably a problem biting other kids at daycare. Mom is a painter with an obsession with organic food, and the author is self-employed selling his writing. His hobbies include listening to music, playing music, dabbling in local politics (there is much to be done in his neighborhood) and smoking a great deal of marijuana.

The problem with Neal Pollack, I think, is that one's interests as an individual and one's responsibilities as a parent are usually apples and oranges - they infrequently coincide. Some people have children to create new and better versions of themselves, boys and girls that they can then become "friends" with along life's crazy journey. While this is not a philosophy that I would categorically dismiss as "wrong" - I do fall into the structure, guidance and love first school of thought - which means that if they like you, great. Bonus. But if you're doing your job correctly there will be plenty of times when they don't like you whatsoever.

This may be the "father" dynamic too. (And, caveat emptor, with all gender observations it only goes so far - it's generally true, but variations and exceptions abound.) Mom can offer more emotional "give" - rising and falling with the sympathies of the child, playing a more reactive role. Dads work best when they are a dependable piece of furniture, constantly supportive, with some rules that simply do not break. But when problems arise, anger isn't helpful either. The ultimate goal is to approach unwanted behavior (in school or the home) with the same Zen peace of mind as the best behavior, the soccer goals, the well-done recitals, and the A+ grades.

All of that matters more than cultural pretensions. I would have preferred to have heard Neal discuss more about his values (be they religious or secular). You see suggestions of this in his handling of certain topics - circumcision, his Jewish heritage, and curiously, but perhaps not surprisingly, the notion of "whether or not he will smoke pot with his son". (He concludes it's none of the reader's business.) And it's easy enough to conclude that he's in the land of loosey-goosey moral relativism - blunder forward, hurt others or yourself, then decide in retrospect what you believe. But I would like to have heard his thoughts anyway, and I would have given him the benefit of the doubt.

The common ground among all fathers, alterna- or generic, is the desire to be there and play some role in the moment of a child's growth. Whether it's Joe Midwest teaching his son to swing a golf club, or Neal Pollack enjoying rock music with Elijah, it's an incredible (albeit natural) high when it happens, when they make the connection.

And I do love those occasions myself. When Miyazaki's "Spirited Away" opened in Cincinnati I brought my daughter the opening week. She was about six. We had dinner at an Indian restaurant and saw the movie. The only other child was in her early teens, and there was whispering about that guy "who brought his kid" - from folks who apparently had know idea that Miyazaki is widely regarded as the Walt Disney of Japan. And my daughter was already, at that point, familiar with his work - our movie collection included Totoro and Kiki's Delivery Service.

All of her friends thought it was "weird". They later said the same thing when they spotted manga comics in her book bag - before later starting to borrow them. And I don't want my girls to be snotty about discovering something in advance of the masses. That would defeat the purpose. But I want them to be comfortable going outside of the range of normal, generic culture, to disregard what uninformed people say, and to seek her own unique experiences. (You need to work a little harder at this, living in Ohio.)

And it's nice to think a father can always be a guide along the way.

Tags: Neal Pollack