Media Matters vs. the MSM Hacks
This plea for less crapulous horserace coverage and more (any) substance should be nailed to the door of every newsroom, stuck on every computer screen on every news desk and slipped into every reporters pocket (or in the case of CNN, stapled to certain people's foreheads).

More Spankers!

"Stick Magnetic Ribbons on Your SUV" has drawn over 12,000 hits to this blog in the last month (and over a quarter of a million on YouTube) so I thought I'd treat all of you to some more from God's Favorite Band. This one is from the video of their tenth anniversary show in Austin. Check the links on the side of the page for their homepage and go BUY ALL THEIR ALBUMS!!! NOW!!

True punditry, thy name is Billmon
Sometimes, I write something and read it and pat myself on the back. Other times I read what someone else has written and think to myself, "Why do I bother to do this when someone else has already done it so much better than I ever will?" Sometimes that someone is Hemingway or Shakespeare or Bob Dylan or Raymond Carver. Sometimes it is Billmon. If you are one of the few people who read this blog that doesn't also read the "Free thinking in a dirty glass" at Billmon's Whiskey Bar, go smack yourself upside your own head and get wise.

When he is on, he is one of the best writers on current affairs you'll ever read, not just on the internet, but anywhere. For sheer elegance in turning a phrase and clarity of thought and expression, I'd put up against any of the TV talking heads and current newspaper and magazine opinion columnist. He could kick David Brooks' sorry ass and eat a dozen Friedmans for dessert. Comparing him with the lamer-than-lame bleating of James Lieks or the cognitive dissonance on parade that is The Corner, would be tooling up with a helicopter gunship for a knife fight against a double amputee.

"None of this babbling makes any sense, in other words. Nor is it remotely in scale with the size of the Cheney administration's failure in Iraq. Part of me thinks it's all being driven by the need of beltway journalists and think tankers alike to have something new to say about Iraq, something that isn't a variation on: "Yep. We're still fucked." But there's obviously a hard edge of real desperation -- if not despair -- behind this. America's ruling elites have had things largely their own way for the past couple of decades. But now they're looking at a bottomless quagimire that may have a much bigger disaster (like loss of access to Persian Gulf oil) hidden somewhere in the mud. And they don't
have a clue about what to do. They've lost control, which is the last thing any ruling elite can afford to admit."

Wavy Gravy alway says:
If you remember the 60's you weren't really there, but this study on Alzheimer's and marijuana indicates that it was better to inhale pot
Actually, I think its not so much that weed prevents Alzheimer's, I think chronic chronic users are just much more accustomed to functioning without their memory working properly.

The Hockey Sweater
One of my all-time favorite stories -- I love the narration by the author, Roch Carrier.

Over the hill and picking up speed
Okay, I've been 40 years old for about 99 minutes now. I don't like it, but I suppose it beats the alternative. I guess I better go do the stuff that 40 year olds do...."Hey you kids, get off the lawn"


addendum: Dave over at the Axis of Evel Knievel fill us in on the religious significance of my birthdate - worship me puny mortal! I am He who Is! and make that cheque payable to "cash"!!!

Dilbert's Unified Theory of Everything Financial
Everything you need to know about money in under 130 words.
From Scott Adams' "Dilbert and the Way of the Weasels."

1. Make a will
2. Pay off your credit cards
3. Get term life insurance if you have a family to support
4. Fund your 401k/pension plan to the maximum
5. Fund your IRA/RRSP to the maximum
6. Buy a house if you want to live in a house and can afford it
7. Put six months worth of expenses in a money-market account
8. Take whatever money is left over and invest 70% in a stock index fund and 30% in a bond fund through any discount broker and never touch it until retirement
9. If any of this confuses you, or you have something special going on (retirement, college planning, tax issues), hire a fee-based financial planner, not one who charges a percentage of your portfolio.

And as my mother the stock broker and financial planner always says: "Pay yourself first" meaning take ten percent of your paycheque and put it straight into the bank before you pay the bills, buy grocieries, beer or anything else.

Guilty until proven innocent
Ex-con (1) and Canadian Justice Minister Vic Toews has brought in a bill to establish a U.S. style three-strikes law in Canada that would see people convicted of a third violent or sexual criminal offense jailed indefinitely as "dangerous offenders." Now, you might be thinking "What's wrong with that? I don't want violent criminals or perverts roaming the streets!" but the catch is that the dangerous offender status is automatic unless the defendant can convince the judge they are not at risk to reoffend - in other words the onus of proof is on the accused, not the accuser.

This is so obivously a political ploy on the part of the Conservatives to show they are "tough on crime" that it is offensive that they would even suggest it. Regular reader already know how this kind of stupid grandstanding pisses me off . How dumb do they think the average Canadian is? Do they really think that someone who gets in three bar brawls deserves to be automatically jailed for life?

Even defense lawyers, who stand to make a fortune from defending all the poor bastards who will suddenly be facing an automatic life sentence, oppose the idea, saying it is abitrary, will clog the courts and lead to shortage of available lawyers. And it won't do a damn thing to fight crime. It is also completely unnecessary since prosecutors can already apply to the judge in cases involving violent or sexual crimes to have defendants declared dangerous offenders, even on a first offense. Toews is saying that he doesn't trust our justice system or the judgement of crown attorneys and judicary.

The three strikes system in the U.S. has not cut the crime rate one iota, has filled prisons to beyond bursting and tied the hands of judges to make reasoned, thoughtful appropriate decisions on sentencing. It just doesn't work (2). But it gives Stephen Harper and Vic Toews the chance to pose with big, strong policemen for the cameras and gives the Conservatives a nice little hobby horse to ride in the next election when they need to distract people from their various screw-ups.

I can see the blogging tories and ex-reform party types foaming at the mouth at the first opposition to this clearly unconstitutional move: "What?!? You mean the Liberals are siding with child molesters and murderers? Clearly such evil liberals cannot be trusted!" (Clutch pearls) "Won't someone think of the children?"

I can see the Conservatives response when the law is struck down as unconstitutional too: "What?!? You mean the Supreme Court is siding with child molesters and murderers? Clearly such evil activist judges cannot be trusted! (clutch pearls/pound podium) "Won't someone think of the children?"


footnotes
(see how thorough and serious I'm being? Aren't you impressed?)
1.On January 25, 2005, Toews pleaded guilty to the charge of exceeding personal campaign expense limits in the 1999 provincial election.[55] Toews claimed that the overspending resulted from a miscommunication between his campaign and the provincial party as to how some expenses were accounted.[56] There were some calls for him to resign as his party's justice critic, but nothing came of this.[57] Toews received a $500 fine, and the charge remains on his record.[58]

2. Take your pick

So it goes
Another day, another Republican accused of nepotism and corruption.
Seriously, if the Democrats can't turn all this into a congressional majority, there is no hope -- it will be time for progressives to organize a third party or emigrate to Canada.

Religious round up
Salon has an amusing juxtaposition of articles this week: A story on Steven Baldwin, who has morphed from C-list actor into A-list evangelist; and a lengthy interview with uber-atheist and top evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins. Now if we could just get the two to take part in a cage match...

On the right we have the faithful:

"Baldwin preaches that free will is a lie of Satan -- we must shut off our brains, he says, and be led by what God tells our hearts. Furthermore, he writes, efforts to end global poverty and violence are just the sort of "stupid arrogance" that incur God's wrath, which we'll be feeling any day now in the coming apocalypse. I suppose when the star of "Bio-Dome" is advising the president and converting kids by the thousands to his gnarly brand of faith, the end is, indeed, nigh. "

While on the left we have the rational:

"What is so bad about religion?
Well, it encourages you to believe falsehoods, to be satisfied with inadequate explanations which really aren't explanations at all. And this is particularly bad because the real explanations, the scientific explanations, are so beautiful and so elegant. Plenty of people never get exposed to the beauties of the scientific explanation for the world and for life. And that's very sad. But it's even sadder if they are actively discouraged from understanding by a systematic attempt in the opposite direction, which is what many religions actually are. But that's only the first
of my many reasons for being hostile to religion. "

In Baldwin's defense, he does consider Bono a tool of Satan - and Dawkins can be a bit of a pushy prick, but still and all, what this boils down to is a dumbass encouraging other people to be dumbasses and a smart, educated guy encouraging people to be smart and educated. Which do you think is likely to make the world a better place?

Sweet Jesus
And they wonder why there is a problem with obesity in North America? As a bit of a lardass, I suppose I'm not in a great position to criticize, but "deep fried Coke"? Why not just take a bag of white sugar, roll it in bacon fat and graham cracker crumbs, deep fry it and inject it straight into your heart?

Rae makes splash in leadership race



Many Ontario voters would like to tell Bob Rae to "go jump in the lake" - Rick Mercer seems to have convinced him to do it.

Despite the picture scramble, I think this shows Rae has the balls to be Prime Minister - or at least that he is the candidate with nothing to hide. It also shows an admirable amount of humility and a sense of humor, things I want my PM to have.

And for Blogging Tories having this read to them: No, there is no double standard involved in the press virtually ignoring this while jumping on "Doris" Day for his arrival at his first press conference on a jet ski. Doris was trying to look cool in his wet suit at an official press conference and this was a joke for a comedy program. It's not even apples and oranges, it's more like rhinos and the national debt, or anthracite coal and sea water, or blogging tories and sane people -- you know, things that are completely different.

I think this and other similar stunts on the Mercer Report -- Rick skydiving with Gen. Hillier, going to Canadian Tire with Prime Minister Paul Martin etc etc -- show a key difference between Canada and most other nations. We refuse to let our leaders take themselves too seriously. Try to imagine George Bush going to the hardware store with Jon Stewart, or Dick Cheney hosting Saturday Night Live.

Readin' Ritin' and Rithmatic
Linwood Barclay in the Toronto Star on the Tories brave new literacy plan. Next from the Conservative brain trust: A new math curriculum that uses only prime numbers, thus saving taxpayers millions of dollars.

Awww, isn't it cute...
We've had our first troll! 15,000 hits - about 5,000 in the last week or so thanks to the Asylum Street Spankers video - and we've finally gotten trolled.

BlameCanada (on blogger since last week) wrote in the comments:
"This is the biggest bunch of crap ever. Tell that out of shape joke of a lead singer to hit the gym and get a haircut. As for him and the rest of the freak show, stop abusing free speech to attack the people that are defending and providing you with that right! You just prove to the rest of the world that Texans ARE retarded, Bush included. You can return to Canada or France whenever. Preferrably sooner rather than later."

I suspect this may be someone I know yanking my chain and hoping to get me to go off on a rant. If so, they have crafted a great and subtle parody of a troll.

Strawman argument? Check.
Misunderstanding of the original material? Check.
Ad Hominem attack and personal insults? Check.
Bad mouthing of French? Check.
General dumbassery? Check.

Now if this dingbat is sincere, let me just ask how it thinks one can "abuse free speech" when it is supposed to be a near absolute. I'd also like to know how the chowderheads whose support of the troops involved in the USA's illegal war in Iraq is limited to slapping magnets on their gas-guzzler are "defending and providing" that right to free speech. And even if the band were referring to the troops - which they pointedly are not - how exactly were the Iraqis threating free speech in the United States?

The puzzling thing is that "BlameCanada" claim to think Bush is an idiot, which leads me to wonder whether it is a real troll or a parody troll. He also dwells on the lead singer being out of shape and having long hair, when in fact the lead singer-Wammo by name and nature-looks fairly dapper in the video and not especially fat (thanks to the lighting and the slimming nature of the black tux). I therefore suspect it is Wammo or someone else from the band - though I would have expected less subtle parody from the rest of the band and more mocking of Wammo.

Putting the Dick in Dictator
From the New York Times (via Bilmon):
Talk to the Vice President, go to jail.
"Mr. Howards, 54, said at a news conference here that he was taking his 8-year-old son to a piano lesson on June 16 at the Beaver Creek Resort about two hours west of Denver when he saw Mr. Cheney at an outdoor mall. Mr. Howards said he approached within two feet of Mr. Cheney and said in a calm voice, “I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible,” or as the lawsuit itself describes the encounter, “words to that effect.”
Mr. Howards said he then went on his way. About 10 minutes later, he said, he was walking back through the area when Agent Reichle handcuffed him and said he would be charged with assaulting the vice president. Local police officers, acting on information from the Secret Service, according to the suit, ultimately filed misdemeanor harassment charges that could have resulted in up to a year in jail."

to quote Billmon, this guy obviously made the mistake of thinking he lived in a free country, instead of one where the President and his underlings now have the legal authority to have you "disappearred" or tortured.

Spookily compatible
Bill Keane meets Friedrich Nietzsche. Yes, it is as weird as it sounds, but in a good way.
A hat to to Lawyers, Guns and Money for the discovery.

"I'm sorry baby, please open the door"
Conrad Black wants his Canadian citizenship back. Words fail me, but not Rick Mercer. However I disagree with Rick that we should let him back in. I don't think we, as a nation, should go back into the abusive relationship we had with Lord Black. After all, he did start the National Post, and that is not something to be forgiven lightly. Mind you, when it comes to Conrad Black, I sympathize with the Alberto Gonzalez view of the Geneva Conventions as "quaint." Black has always been one of the worst people in the world and if it were up to me, he would be hunted with dogs for sport every autumn.

It's the election, stupid
Richard Gwyn has an interesting piece in the Toronto Star today on the Liberal leadership race. Discussing who will get all the votes in a second ballot, he suggests that delegates must consider who they want to lead the party into the next election and how they view the next election.

He contends that there are two basic approaches: One that considers the next election a dead loss and the leadership race a vote on who will be the best opposition leader and best choice to lead the party into the next election after that some four or five years down the road, and one that considers the next election the most crucial. The former approach, Gwyn argues favors a second ballot swing to the youngest of the four main contenders, Gerald Kennedy, as it would give him four years to work on his French, gain a national profile and make the change from Queen's Park politics to the federal scene. The latter approach favours Bob Rae as a candidate who could go to the polls tomorrow with a national profile and the ability to go toe-to-toe with Steve Harper.

Nice theory, but there are a few problems with it, just as there are with everything involved in the Liberal leadership race. Gwyn's right in this respect-- it is all about the next election. Kennedy would make a good leader of the opposition, as would Rae and possibly Dion. Both Rae and Kennedy have good parliamentary instincts and can counter-punch and run rhetorical rings around Harper. Rae in Parliament would likely eat Harper's lunch before breakfast on a daily basis, and a few years as leader of the opposition might convince Ontario voters to forget their (IMO undeserved) grudge against him for his tenure as premier. Ignatief doesn't strike me as someone who has any interest in being leader of the opposition for any length of time. If he doesn't get to be Prime Minister or a least a senior cabinet minister, he'll go back to Harvard. If we must concede an election to the Conservatives - and I don't think we do - then Rae and Kennedy would be good choices as long term leaders of the opposition who could lead the party into power four years down the road.

Unfortunately, my dog in this race - Ken Dryden- may not be the best choice for a leader of the opposition either as he is not quick with the sharp sound bite. He is not especially gifted at the the slash and parry repartee of the House, but is better at coming up with policy and making big, meaty speeches - he'd give a hell of a prime ministerial address, but as far as day to day brawling in the House, its just not his thing.

If the Liberals dig in their heels as they should and refuse to concede the next election - and there is no reason they should concede given the precarious state of the Conservatives popularity - then this leadership race is all about picking a leader whose vision and policies are acceptable and who can beat Stephen Harper on the husting next spring or summer. Kennedy can't do it - no one in Quebec or the west knows or cares who he is. Rae can't do it - the Liberals won't win without winning big in Ontario and Rae will have a real problem there. He presents a good contrast to Harper and would pull a lot of NDP votes, but he is the just the guy Stephen Harper would like to run against as he would energize the Conservative base and push the Ontario business community firmly into the Tory camp.

What about the front runner? Ignatief versus Harper in a quick election would be a disaster for the Liberals. Ignatief will get the Al Gore treatment from the former Reform party --"he's an ivory tower intellectual from Harvard, our guy likes beer and hockey." His support for Bush's methods in the War on Terror will push small L liberals to back the NDP and result in a Conservative majority. He's not likely to stay on as Leader of the Opposition in such a situation, even if offered that opportunity by the party (which he wouldn't be). His people are touting him as the second coming of Trudeau, but I don't think we really need Margret back in 24 Sussex.

Nope, if the Liberals need someone who can beat Stephen Harper and the Conservative next Spring, the best choice is Dryden. He has the lowest negative reaction among the general voting population according to the Gandalf poll and would steal a lot of swing voters from Harper across the country. He is a well known and proven element. He may not be flashy, but he is as solid as a rock on policy and has a liberal vision of Canada that matches the values of most Canadians. And most importantly, he would kick Stephen Harper's reactionary ass from St. John to Vancouver Island, from Windsor to Yellowknife.

It's all about context
the Editors over at The Poor Man Institute blow the whistle on the mainstream media's attempt to blackguard Tom Foley by taking his completely innocent emails and instant messages out of context. I smell a Koufax award in the offing.

Because its a long way to the Beer Store from Kandahar
Moosehead donating suds after troops in Afghanistan make request. Because chasing Taliban through the mountains all day is thirsty work.