US military manages to out-parody itself

Congratulations. It couldn't have been easy for spokespeople to come up with something like this. Up is Down! Black is White!

The Pentagon on Wednesday said an eruption of violence in southern Iraq, where US-backed government forces were battling Shiite militias, was a "by-product of the success of the surge."

Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said it showed that the Iraqi government and security forces were now confident enough to take the initiative against Shiite extremists in the southern port of Basra.

Don't you get it? It's violent BECAUSE we are winning! That is, it appears that we are losing precisely because we are not losing. Sheesh, why don't you idiots get it?

Our cruel culture: prison prohibits father from visiting dying daughter

As the parent to a young girl, it's impossible to read a story dealing with parenthood and not feel some sort of twinge at the old heart strings. Thus, I'm more affected by the following story than I might have been two years ago. Nevertheless, it's hard to view it as anything other than the product of a culture that increasingly feels no sense of sympathy for those who deserve nothing but care and tenderness.

The facts are simple: a young girl, 10 years old, lies dying of brain cancer in a Nebraska hospital. Her father, meanwhile, is in South Dakota, serving a 4 1/2 year sentence for a drug offense. Leaving aside for a moment the idiocy of prison sentences in our "war on drugs," we are faced with the sad news that the warden of the prison has decided to reject the prisoner's request to be transferred to a prison closer to his daughter so that he might occasionally see her in the final month of her life. That's right: he's not asking to have his sentence commuted or anything of the sort, just that he might be transferred from one prison to another.

Why? Well, the reasons are almost laughably absurd: because the circumstances are "not extraordinary." One wonders what could possibly be more extraordinary or compelling than a child dying of cancer. It's hard to read this story and feel anything other than sheer revulsion at people who could be so heartless--not to the father, although it's cruel to him, too, but to the 10 year old girl facing the last month of her life, and knowing that her father cannot be with her.

What should happen here? Well, it's clear. First, the prison should come to its senses and give this man a chance to see his daughter. Second, the governor of the state, if he has the power, should arrange for a transfer. Thirdly, our beloved President, the man who commuted Scooter Libby's sentence because HIS family had suffered, should intervene to transfer this poor girl's dad to a new prison, one that would allow him the chance to see his daughter.

The most disturbing thing about this story is what it reveals about our culture, one that has developed almost a fetish for seeing "punishment" carried out against people we dislike. Whether it is an innocent man in Guantanamo Bay, kept shackled and isolated for years without even being charged with a crime, or a man being kept apart from his dying daughter, we demand that our systems of justice inflict the most brutal punishments, mental and physical, on prisoners. Why? What possible rehabilitative uses can such punishments serve? Well, none, of course. Keeping this guy away from his daughter will do nothing other than nurture within him a burning rage against society, yet the prison warden keeps his head down and insists on the policy.

It's a shame, an embarrassment, and an outrage.

Al Gore is a political failure when it comes to leadership in the Democratic Party

I'm going to ask a very simple question that has really been bothering me as I contemplate the long-term consequences of the increasingly bitter battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton: where the living hell is Al Gore? He is perhaps the sole figure in the Democratic political hierarchy who, by virtue of a speech, conference, or interview, could change the dynamic and propel one of the two candidates towards the nomination. Normally that role would fall to the last Democratic president, but since Bill Clinton is the spouse of one of the two candidates, that is an impossibility. So Gore, with his impressive credentials and widespread popularity (not to mention his having won nearly every non-political award of late other than the Cy Young), is the one guy who could step up to the microphone and urge some way forward.

So what's the problem? Is it that he, for example, doesn't like either Clinton or Obama? That seems possible, but certainly he understands the importance of electing one of them over McCain. (Unless, of course, he's planning his own run for 2012.) Does he feel a sense of loyalty to the Clintons, and is he therefore staying out of the way for fear of stepping on their toes by endorsing Obama? It's hard to say, as he has remained, frustratingly, on the sidelines for the past few months. The party is in dangerous territory here, with one candidate seemingly hell bent on attacking the states, voters, and racial groups that have so far propelled her opponent to the lead. It seems highly unlikely that the Democrats would stand an easy chance of winning the general election with a fractured base, yet no "distinguished elders" in the party have lifted a finger.

The three people who garner the most respect in Democratic circles, and who are not affiliated with either campaign, are Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, and John Edwards. None of them has made the slightest move to break this stalemate. Gore, because of his role in the 2000 elections, is, I think, the most important of this threesome, so it is his absence that is the most frustrating and maddening. Gore, I suspect, is still living in his "the work I do is so much MORE than politics" dreamworld. It would be nice if he bothered to return to reality.

NY Times tracks down Spitzer's "Kristen," provides unintentional hilarity

The NY Times has done the impossible and located "Kristen," the (alleged) call-girl at the center of the Eliot Spitzer idiot-who-pays-$4,300-for-hookers scandal. And, amidst the usual woe-is-me story about difficult upbringing, they bust out with this moment of hilarity

Her MySpace biography says that she started singing professionally after a musician she was living with heard her singing Aretha Franklin’s “Respect” in the shower and burst into the bathroom with his lead guitarist.

Uh, riiiiight. That's why he burst into the bathroom while you were in the shower. Umm hmmm.


"Kristen"

A few questions about this whole Ferraro thing

Ever since the Clinton campaign came up with the dubious strategy of having disgraced loser Geraldine Ferraro leads its racist dogwhistle attack against the Obama campaign, I've been left wondering a few things. Not, "is Geraldine Ferraro actually Camilla Parker Bowles, but with better teeth and hair?" but actual political questions. Namely:

1) Is it a really good idea to court one group of voters IN THE PRIMARY by attacking another group of voters? Granted, this makes a certain degree of sense for a general election, but I'm not exactly sure it's the smartest strategy to pursue in the primary, as presumably you'll have to go after that same group of people you just alienated.

2) Given that, does it make a lot of sense to court a group of people (conservative whites) who are more likely to desert you in the general election by trashing a group of people who are more likely to be loyal to you in the general election? I mean, I suppose you could make the argument that because conservative whites are more likely to vote McCain, Clinton needs to bring them to her side NOW, whereas since blacks are fairly reliably Democratic voters, there's no real need to court them at this point. However, by encouraging attacks that are certain to depress black turnout in a general election, I think the Clinton campaign is really shooting itself in the foot.

3) Finally, is it that smart to have as your spokesperson one of the two people on the Democratic ticket that incurred the most dramatic loss in the past 40 years? Does anyone think of Mondale/Ferraro and say "woah, now THERE was a winning ticket!" Hell no! I was 10 years old in 1984, and I knew they had no chance. I mean, the Mondale/Ferraro campaign made the Dukakis/Bentsen campaign look like a political juggernaut. Is she really the person you want out front and center, making your racist points for you? Because, great, now you've got people thinking you are a racist, and subconsciously associating you with the losingest ticket in Democratic party history.

Spitzer takes a page from the Clinton playbook...

I dunno, just doesn't seem quite as catchy...

At some point we're going to have to face the fact that John McCain is quite old and perhaps not in the greatest health

I know the whole "when the White House phone rings at 3 a.m., who do you want answering it?" thing is kind of a lame bit, but, seriously, do you want someone who's been asleep for TEN HOURS already and who generally looks confused by the crazy technology that is elevators? Is this the face of a president who's going to strike fear into the heart of any dictator who is physically capable of eating a bowl of soup without drooling?


(Source: AP)

George W. Bush is the biggest goddam idiot in world history

Sometimes you need to write a tons of stuff about something in order to communicate just how great/horrible/insane/revolutionary it is. Sometimes, though, all you need to do is post a photo and its Associated Press caption to capture the true horror of the moment. This is one of those times.


Actual AP caption: This three-picture combination of photographs shows President Bush dancing on the North Portico of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, March 5, 2008, as he awaits the arrival of Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak).

God help us.

Political analogy of the day: Democratic Party = pre-2004 Boston Red Sox

I have this looming pit of despair in my stomach as I sit and look out at the political landscape, wondering who the Democrats will nominate to run against Walnuts McCain. It's no secret that I'm a Barack Obama supporter--I like the guy, and think he has a vastly better shot against McCain in the general election. My concern that Hillary Clinton will find a way to win, however, has made me realize that the Democratic Party is really the political equivalent of the pre-2004 Boston Red Sox. Those Red Sox were always a loveable bunch of losers who managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory time after time, often doing so in a fashion that caused their fans immeasurable heartache and angst.

Red Sox lore, for example, would not be complete without the 1986 World Series, in which a fatal error by Bill Buckner cost the team game 6 of the 7 game series, or the 2003 American League Championship Series, in which manager Grady Little let a clearly tiring Pedro Martinez keep pitching, ultimately costing his team the game. It is this type of loss--not just a loss, but a spirit-crushing loss--that reminds me of the Democratic Party today.

I don't expect the Democratic Party to just do the wrong thing and end up nominating Hillary Clinton--I expect them to nominate Hillary Clinton in the most artless way possible, alienating a huge chunk of their base and destroying the positive experience his campaign has brought to millions of people. Rest assured, it will happen. The same party that found a way to lose the 2000 and 2004 elections against, respectively, a dunce-like governor and a clear failure of a president, will somehow find a way to lose the 2008 presidential election against a certified fossil like McCain.

Oh, believe me, I sense the enthusiasm in the electorate, and notice that Hillary and Obama are outraising McCain something like 8:1. And I see that together they are getting something like 4x as many votes as McCain in recent primaries. And I see that while McCain gives his "victory" speeches from inside elevators with four or five equally old white guys behind him, Obama frequently gives his before overflow audiences in sports arenas that hold 18,000 people. I see all that. Sadly, this makes me even MORE convinced that Hillary will be the nominee.

The Dems will find a way to squander all the positive emotion and grass-roots energy the Obama campaign has created, and will instead nominate a divisive political insider who is hated by roughly half the country before her campaign has even started. Rest assured, they will find a way. Just as Red Sox fans used to tell themselves "no matter how good the season looks now, we'll find a way to lose," the Democrats will certainly waste their best opportunity to take the White House in years. The only question at this point is what ingenious method they'll chose to choke it away. Will it take a lawsuit, filed by Clinton supporters, to overturn the Texas primary results? Will the Clinton campaign push a bitter floor fight at the convention to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates? Stay tuned! It's not a question of whether, but how.

Irony alert: anti-shark device eaten by shark

This is funny in that ha-ha-it's-ironic-even-though-it-revolves-around-something-pretty-horrible way. Apparently a new anti-shark device that "works" by causing involuntary contraction of the muscles in a shark's body does not work in the sense that it actually attracts sharks and then causes them to eat it.

AN electronic device designed to ward sharks away from surfers failed so spectacularly during a trial off South Africa that it was eaten by a great white.

An inquest heard yesterday the Shark Shield surf model was activated on a float carrying bait when the 3.6m female shark approached. Rather than being deterred by the device, the shark, under the gaze of the Natal Sharks Board, bit into it.

South Australian Deputy State Coroner Tony Schapel yesterday heard of the test failure during the inquest into the death of Jarrod Stehbens, who was taken by a great white shark while diving off Glenelg in South Australia in 2005.

The inquest has turned into a trial of Shark Shield devices, hearing concerns that the electronic fields generated to repel sharks may attract them.

A startling discovery, in which I discover the origin of the phrase "Mission Accomplished."

With all the modesty I can muster, I have to admit that this is a startling bit of investigative research on my part, and so, in a Drudge-esque moment of self-reflection and humility, I will now trumpet my discovery on my blog.

Whilst tripping through the internet I have accidentally stumbled upon the Washingtonian origin of the phrase "Mission Accomplished," a term that was until now forever linked to our half-wit President and his exotic day of make believe dress up on board the USS Abraham Lincoln. Here's a reminder, for those of you who possess the mental skill to have blocked that horrible memory from your mind forever:

However, as much prominence as that specific usage of the term has received, I found a previous, more shameful (yet, predictably, still very much related to Republican shenanigans) example of it. Check it out!



Recognize that? If the names don't give it away, the pretentious language, schoolmarmish panic over sex, and the obsessive detail paid to the bodily fluids of leading members of our government might. That's right! It was in the Starr Report! So, just as Barack Obama plagiarizes Devan Patrick every time he says 'Yes We Can," we can now state with confidence that George Bush was plagiarizing the Starr Report that fateful day aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln when he stood beneath the Mission Accomplished banner. Incredible!

Let's play 5 Degrees of Tim Russert

In the Democratic debate the other night, Tim Russert embarrassed himself, the state of Massachusetts, journalists, and fat people with oversized heads everywhere by posing a convulted question to Barack Obama that went something like this: a guy who knows a guy you know said something bad and now you need to denounce not only the statement but the man himself, or else we (that is, I, Tim Russert) will judge you unfit for the presidency.

Given that this is the new standard of journalism, I've decided to invent a new game, "5 Degrees of Tim Russert," in which you establish a link between a prominent politician and someone who either said or did something reprehensible, and then demand that the politician denounce that person. It goes something like this (count the degrees of separation in this argument):

Mitt Romney's (1) favorite book is "Battlefield Earth." (It is, he said so in an interview.) This book was written by L. Ron Hubbard (2), who started Scientology. Scientology is a religion particularly favored by Tom Cruise (3). Tom Cruise is an actor who was in the movie "Top Gun," which co-starred Val Kilmer (4). Val Kilmer is a "Promise Keeper," which is a men's movement started by former Colorado University head football coach Bill McCartney (5). Bill McCartney cheated on his wife. Given that Mitt Romney endorsed by John McCain, can we therefore conclude that John McCain wants everyone to cheat on their wives? WHEN WILL JOHN MCCAIN DENOUNCE BILL MCCARTNEY AND THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOOTBALL TEAM?

It's fun--try it yourself!

George W. Bush: just as proudly out-of-touch as his idiot dad

Years ago, in the halcyon days of the FIRST Bush presidency, we were blessed with the now-iconic image of Poppy being completely surprised by the remarkable technology of a supermarket scanner. Just as it is hilarious to laugh at your mom when she discovers this hot new music all the kids are listening to, "rap," or expresses her fear that the kids these days may be "taking the pot," it was pretty funny to discover that our president had no idea about an ordinary item that we proles use on a daily basis.

So imagine my surprise today when the idiot son of that president, George W. Bush, proudly took to the podium at the White House and admitted his ignorance about the economic conditions faced by consumers across the country. Take it away, CNN:

When asked what advice he would give to the average person facing the prospect of gas prices hitting $4 per gallon, Bush stopped the reporter and said, "What did you just say? You're predicting $4 a gallon gas?"

"That's interesting. I hadn't heard that," he said at the Thursday news conference.

Yes, indeed, predictions of $4 gas have been remarkably difficult to come by lately.

Gasoline price is heading to $4 gallon
Economist: $4 gas possible
Gasoline may hit $4/gallon
Expert predicts gas to hit $4 mark
Analysts see $4 gas by spring: report

Uh, that was from "the Google," Mr. President. Took me about 3 seconds to find. Yesterday the headline on my local paper (The Oregonian) blared, in huge type, "$4 GAS?" Sheesh. Yet again the nation is cursed by an idiotically out-of-touch member of the Bush family in office, ruining the economy and getting us into a war in Iraq.

Presenting the ugliest pair of men's pants created since 1978

J.Crew, you are officially on notice. Now, I've been tempted to poke great fun at your catalogs and their incessant "look how fun it is to summer at the Cape!" motifs, or your insistence on using the singular "pant" all the time, or your continuing belief that Americans are desperate to own khakis emblazoned with small lobsters or sailboats or other relics of the aforementioned summering at the Cape. But, I have held my tongue out of, who knows, perhaps a deep-seated nostalgia for those days in college when I'd get a new article of clothing from J. Crew and would feel the momentary satisfaction of having my fashion sense rise from 10 years out of date to a mere 5 years out of date.

However, I happened to glance at your "pant" sale today, and can keep my silence no longer. You have forced me to stand, eyeball to eyeball, with the ugliest pair of men's pants I have ever seen outside the Deseret Industries thrift store in Salt Lake City where I used to purchase my Halloween costumes. And those were always ironic. So far as I can gather, not a stitch of irony went into the creation of these pants. Behold, America!



Classic fit Italian Paisley Cord Pant

Introducing a perfect cocktail pant, with a traditional paisley on cotton corduroy imported from one of Italy's finest print houses.

"Perfect cocktail pant"? The hell? Just what kind of crazy cocktail parties are you attending, J.Crew copywriter, where such an egregious violation of everything we hold dear as a nation is not only tolerated but encouraged? Good lord. And, it must be noted, this spectacular pair of pants will set you back a mere $99.99. Egads.

Too pretty to fly? Or, perhaps, just stupid?

There's a silly story in the news today about two women in Florida who claim they were kicked off a Southwest Airlines flight for "being too pretty." Those catty flight attendants, apparently, couldn't tolerate the mind-numbing hawtness of these two young lasses, and so had them escorted off the flight by four (!!) police officers. The women were at first refused water (perhaps to sooth their searing hotness?) by the flight attendants, an oversight that paled in comparison to the next outrage:

At one point, Williams had to use the plane's bathroom. She saw another passenger in it, and when he hadn't come out 15 minutes later, she knocked on the door.

When he came out, Williams says the man came over to her seat and yelled a profanity at her. Williams admits she yelled a profanity back at him but was puzzled when she says the flight crew only questioned her.

Ok, simple question: a guy on your flight has been in the bathroom--a small room roughly the size of the trunk of a compact car--for FIFTEEN MINUTES. Do you seriously want to use the bathroom right after him?

Honestly, from that point on, I couldn't trust the judgement of these two.

ABCNews won't let some pesky political issue distract them from Matthew McConaughey's abs

Seriously, ABC? This is what you run on your big fancy political blog? Woah. Just goes to show what a late-night deadline, some rudimentary Photoshop skillz, and a Wedding Planner/Reign of Fire/Sahara marathon will do to the otherwise sensible art instincts of a blog editor.

A damn song I can't get out of my head--Felice Brothers, "Frankie's Gun"

Last weekend a friend and I caught a nifty performance by the Drive By Truckers here in Portland. Since I was pretty familiar with their stuff before the show I was nothing other than impressed by their stuff. However, the opening act, the "Felice Brothers," proved to be a true revelation. Holy hell, where did these guys come from? Not exactly sure how to characterize their music, but it's a kind of downhome gritty Americana kind of thing. Hell, they have a full-time washboard player in the band, and you can't beat that with a stick. The music isn't exactly the same, but the feeling I had watching them reminded me of how I felt when I first caught Whiskeytown, one of my all time favorites, back in 1997 when I caught them in Salt Lake City. Same energy, same fire, same sweet sweet songs. (Hopefully these guys won't flame out in spectacular fashion as did Whiskeytown.)

They have an album coming out in early March, but the below video is for what is sure to be their breakout hit, "Frankie's Gun."

"My car goes, Chicago
Every weekend to pick up some cargo
I think I know the bloody way by now Frankie;
Turn the goddam radio down, thank you.
Pull over, count the money
But don't count the thirty in the glove box, buddy--
That's for to buy Lucille some clothes."

A phrase that should strike fear into the heart of anyone with a brain

Overheard on the radio on the way to work this morning:

"From the creative visionary who brought you Christina Aguilera, Fergie, and the Pussycat Dolls."

Portland media watch: KGW issues biased, one-sided report on Columbia Gorge casino

Ah, the Columbia Gorge. The mythic strait through which sailed Lewis and Clark, and in so doing cemented Oregon's status as a frontier state touched by nature's grandeur. An unspoilt wilderness, hewn out of granite, forged by volcanoes and the steady anvil of rain and snow. Truly, one of our nation's scenic wonders. And...perhaps soon to a monstrous eyesore of a casino. Wait, wha? Yeah, well, you wouldn't know it to read this puff piece of a news story by the Associated Press and picked up by local the wunderkinds over at KGW news in Portland.

Titled, lamely, "Proposal for Casino in Gorge proceeds to next step," the article tells you everything you might want to know except, of course, why anyone would be opposed to this damn thing. Environmental groups? Yeah, they're a wee bit upset about it. Folks who fear the impact of traffic in Cascade Locks? Yeah, they're a bit upset about it as well. But not the chamber of commerce types over in Cascade Locks! No, it's all gravy, baby!

"We're very happy," Cascade Locks Executive Director Chuck Daughtry told KGW. "This means jobs and tourism" for Cascade Locks. "We recruited them... and we can't imagine a better partner."

The Warm Springs Tribes would stand to make an expected yearly profit of $77 million from the casino and benefits to Cascade Locks were predicted around $50 million over the next 25 years.

Hell, sounds awesome! Who could possibly oppose such a rad casino? Nobody but a bunch of damn hippies who hate gambling, and, uh, environmental damage, not to mention the intrusion of a massive casino in a scenic wonderland.

Guess what? I typed "Columbia Gorge Casino" into Google, and the first damn link was to the "Friends of the Gorge" a non-profit group based out of Hood River, with some information about why this thing sucks so bad. There's also a group of Cascade Locks residents opposed to the casino.

Really, not hard to find this stuff at all. Not hard to present both sides of the puzzle. Gah, our local media sucks.

Oh, and note the URL of the KGW article: it ends with "kgw_021508_environment_casino_impact.c5878d47.html." Got that? Environment casino impact. A concept important enough to put into the URL, but not into the article itself. INteresting, no?

Portland real estate: plunging values, or realistic pricing at last?

As a resident of SE Portland, one of my pet hobbies is tracking the crazy real estate transactions that have gripped the 'hood in recent years. Houses that sold for $250,000 in June would sell for $325,000 the following February, only to sell for $389,000 in June. It was (or should have been) obvious to everyone that such dramatic increases were not sustainable, and that the resulting crash-and-boom would be a grimly painful reminder that every boom must have its bust. Until quite recently, however, I have not been confronted with dramatic evidence of the new reality in residential real estate. There have been quite a few stories claiming that Portland seems to be weathering the national storm quite well, and, until recently, anecdotal evidence (which for me consists of the things I see as I take my dog on walks through the neighborhood) seemed to bear this out.

However, I was recently struck by the dramatic decrease in value of one particular house on my route. The house, a large classic Portland home, probably 100 years old, is located in a nice part of SE Portland, close to many shops and restaurants, and surrounded by equally nice houses. Crime, while existent, mainly takes the form of petty theft, and streets and schools in the area are fairly good. The house has a current asking price of $499,000.



To the average person driving past while looking for real estate bargains, this may seem fairly routine. Nothing dramatic on the surface. However, what the dedicated dog-walking enthusiast in the neighborhood knows is that, until only recently, the house was on the market for $659,000.

Turning to PortlandMaps, and the detail it provides about the recent history for this house, we see something interesting.

Back in 1990, it sold for $87,000, not a small amount of money, as the neighborhood in those days was something of a drug-infested eyesore. It really kicked into high gear in 2002, however, selling for $339,000. In June of 2006 it sold again, this time for $570,000, a tidy increase of $230,000. Something, however, happened between June of 2006 and December of 2007. The house, after sitting for months on the market with an asking price of $659,000, sold towards the end of the year for $494,500, a decline of nearly $100,000 in 18 months, and $160,000 under the asking price. It now sits empty at the current asking price of $499,000.

What was it? What happened? Did something happen to the house itself? A fire, perhaps, or a plague of locusts? Flooding? No. The house, actually, underwent a substantial amount of rehab in that period. In fact, it is much nicer, and has more "street appeal" now than it did when it sold for $570,000. It has been painted, given new wood floors, a new kitchen, and basement work. It is actually a very decent house, albeit one with a small yard.

What explains the decline? Is there something unique to the personal history of the owners of this place (note that the current holder of the deed is a bank, not a person)--a divorce, unfortunate medical event, or something similar? Did personal tragedy strike, requiring a quick sale at basement prices? Or does the new owner of this property recognize that the market that once supported a price of $570,000 for this house can today do no better than $499,000.

Is this house a statistical outlier, or the proverbial canary in the coal mine?