Oconomowoc Daily

While I Was Still Out -- Oddly Enough Already

2007-02-22T22:27:00.000-06:00

Sorry folks. Work has been hellish lately. Deposition after deposition after deposition, with 40-page briefs and discovery fights interspersed in between.

Luckily enough, the status in Washington has, essentially, been quo. I don't see anything incredibly new, although (a) the Democrats in the Senate are thinking about doing something binding with respect to Iraq, and (b) Joe Lieberman is floating a deniable balloon about a switch that would throw the Senate to the Republicans. To which I say: ugh. The Dems make some extremely small steps towards where the electorate are, and Joe acts like he lost his binky.

Meanwhile, while the Great American Public focuses on the otherworldly Anna Nicole Smith nonsense, in the real Oconomowoc (which, I will say once again, this site does not represent), a porn fan gets treated to an attack by a swordsman. With an actual sword, yet.

While I Was Out -- Don't Be Afraid to Give 'er!

2007-02-12T18:59:00.000-06:00

Since being dumped, I pulled an all-nighter, lost my wallet, cancelled all my credit cards, found my wallet in (wait for it) my pants pocket a couple of days later, pulled another all-nighter, and contracted a fantastically wonderful cold, which is still present about six days later. I haven't had a good night's sleep in weeks.

And then this weekend. Still working on the cold, and seeking a really good meal (read = waffles!), I found that my car would not start -- requiring Jump Start No. 2 of the current cold snap. Next day, waiting at a drive-thru, a homeless guy walks up. I start to drive off, and he spits on me.

Thus, blogging has been out of the question--much less a deep analysis of policy. I thought about reading through the FY 2008 Budget, which dropped last week. Then the nurse brought my medication--which, oddly enough, cannot unblock my damn ears. (I much prefer not breathing through my nose to not hearing through my ears. There are alternate routes for air; I can't very well listen to people through my armpits.)

But suck it up we must. The House gets full marks for doing what the Senate seems totally incapable of doing--i.e., anything. We have a resolution to debate! And I love the fact that it is simple and direct:

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That—

(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and

(2) Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.

So the GOP can't pull a "you really hate the troops, don't you" on those who vote for this thing. But better than that, it is an on-off vote. You like what the President's doing? Vote no. You don't like what the President's doing? Vote yes. The various resolutions in the Senate were dandy and all, but they were so nuanced that they couldn't quite get together on one that they really, really liked. Now the House is going to (likely) pass this one and send it to (yep) the Senate, where they will have something to pass, or at least kick around for a while.

Yes: it's non-binding. But it wasn't until last year when the Dems began to show even baby teeth on this sort of thing. A small step forward is better than three guys in the Senate sleeping through a quorum call any day of the week.

Debate starts tomorrow at 10. Bring popcorn.

And by the way: Hey, Mr. Howard! Yeah, you--the one standing next to the wife of the Prime Minister of Australia. Which would make you the Prime Minister of Australia. Who the hell asked you anything about Barack Obama? Nobody? Figured.

Of course, this is not the first tangle between the States and Down Under. This too shall pass.

The Meter -- See You Around, Molly

2007-01-31T20:11:00.000-06:00

Well.... oh, screw it.

Me: 0. Let's see here. On Saturday, I get dumped. On Monday, a fellow lawyer throws me under the bus. On Tuesday, I lose my wallet. Wednesday consists of an all-nighter, partially taken up by cancelling credit cards and filling out police reports in the dead of a fucking cold night, and the rest taken up by drafting papers on a tight deadline, all while fighting off sleep like a punch-drunk boxer.

I'm not a Prozac guy, but that could really take the edge off. But, then again, pills aren't candy! No NO NO NO!

Joe Biden: 0. OK. Democratic candidates have to shut the fuck up for the next two months. Joe Biden had to open his mouth, and he's ruined it for the rest of you. Sorry.

[/snark]

Molly Ivins: 10. Damn it. May she and her whip-smart mind rest in peace.

While I Was Out -- Oh Yeah!

2007-01-30T22:00:00.000-06:00

Work continues to suck royally. In fact, I gotta run to the office for some all-night hot briefing action. Which is the only action I am going to get for a while, as my baby done left me, as of this past Saturday. (Awww.)

I would be emoting about it and such, being broken up about it and stuff, but this is a snark zone, which allows no room for sentimentalism, or emotions (other than gleeful derision), or statements designed to bucking oneself up (as in, "she doesn't know what she's missing," or "you won't be lonely forever--it is mathematically impossible"). Nope, no sadness here. No.... sadness.

[collapses on desk in deep, uncontrollable sobs]

Why?! Why do I have to endure this? What did I do wrong? WAAAAAA!

[/collapsing]

Oh, well. Back to the drawing board. Just like Barack Obama:

Of course, going back to the drawing board has its downfalls. People go back to the drawing board all the time with bright ideas, but it never seems to work out. Even if you try multiple times. (See, e.g., the last 2:41 of this clip.)

The Meter -- "Who Are Three People Who Have Never Been In My Kitchen?"

2007-01-24T22:29:00.000-06:00

So I took the Jeopardy! online contestant test tonight. I did well--maybe well enough to get through to the show. We'll see.

Chuck Hagel: 10. A little bit of whup-ass never hurt anybody. And he delivered some today. Watch and learn:

The reason outer space exists because it's afraid to be on the same planet with Chuck Hagel.

[No. That's Chuck Norris. Sorry.]

Liveblog Special -- Strong? Please Tell Me The SOTU Is Strong!

2007-01-23T19:48:00.001-06:00

Preamble. Well, here we go. I'm exhausted from work, but I have Dunkin' Donuts coffee. (Because I don't speak Fritalian.) And the crowd's filing in, so we should be close. (It's also 1952, so the clock tells me it's close, too.) All of this is fancy talk for I'm sleepy, and might not be totally coherent. But, then again, neither will the President, if recent form holds.

Hors d'oeuvres? In Baraboo, Wis., students have been banned from chanting U-S-A at sporting events? Why? Because it is now a coded message! "You suck ass" cannot be said, much less chanted repeatedly, at a high school, you see. Oh, kids. (Wait! Is it too late to pass a note to the Dems in the House?)

2000 (8 o'clock, don't you know). Game time! Laura looks nice. She always does. And the Supremes come in. Four of them, anyway.

2004. Apparently, instructions from the top: no funny stuff from the Dems tonight. We'll see. It'll be too bad if there isn't a joke or two.

2006. The word on the speech is that Iraq is getting shuffled back in the speech, for obvious reasons. People tuning in might be bent about this, to the point of throwing stuff at the TV in anger. But he's the President, and you're not. So there. Still--how exactly is he going to handle it? It'll be delicious, for sure.

2008. By the way, gang: comment box is open. If I run out of ideas, you are more than welcome to throw down. And... George W. Bush? Come on down!

2011. Nancy Pelosi reax shots. That'll be good. And he's getting to the stairs now.

2013. Nice clam clap from Steven Breyer. And nice applause for Nancy.

2015. Wait, what happened to Norwood?

2016. Not leave problems for the next generation. Ha! Cross the aisle? We'll see about that.

2018. It seems impossible to point out, from either side, that manufacturing jobs are being lost, thousands upon thousands, every month. Unemployment going down is nice, but what kind of jobs are being created?

2019. C-SPAN joke. Dorky.

2020. Why does John McCain always look like he has something up his sleeve? Because he does. Ted Kennedy looking pensive. Or sleepy. I'm with you, pal.

2022. Flexibility in education. Somewhere, teacher union bosses are gnashing teeth. Lukewarmish response from the Dems, but they pick up on the health care note.

2024. Tax deductability of health care insurance? Why do I think this is a big shell game? I get health care from work. Do I get to deduct for money I do not pay out of my own pocket? And for the uninsured? I need more on this one.

2026. Affordable care grants to the states? State legislators are licking their chops at that honey pot.

2027. Junk lawsuits. Speaking as a lawyer: bastard. Pat Leahy looks bemused.

2029. Temporary worker plan--still quite unpopular with the hard right folks, of course. But he may gets some help from the Dems on this one.

2030. Energy policy now. Which means ethanol. The Iowa caucuses have nothing at all to do with that, of course. Chuck Grassley looks like he is going to have a birthday party in his pants.

2032. 20% reduction in gas through CAFE standards? The Big Three are gonna love that. But he doesn't say the word Alaska in this speech. And good for him--he cops to global warming. That didn't take him too long.

2034. Judges should be confirmed, now. Yeah, George, that'll be the day.

2035. Here we go--terrorism.

2038. Greatest hits so far from the President. Nothing new, yet.

2041. Transitional government in 2005. More purple fingers. Then: blowback--including a giveaway in Afghanistan.

2045. "Let us find our resolve," he says. "New plan," he says. Rehash of a couple of weeks ago, pretty much.

2047. Looks like he's building an out--if the Iraqis don't come through, we can split.

2048. New recruits for terrorism? Well, you've done a good enough job of that. And if you split now, you forget 9-11. Nicely done. Jackass.

2052. Volunteer civilian service corps? What ever happened to FreedomCorps anyway?

2054. Big talk on Darfur. And also the great evil that is Minsk. (Which, admittedly, is old-school Russia. Unlike Russia, which is also, well... OK. They're old-school Russia too.)

2055. Speaking of Darfur: no mention of New Orleans tonight, thus far (and probably not at all). Maybe all of the talk in the run-up to the game on Sunday had everybody Katrinaed out.

2056. Mutumbo! Give me a finger-wag, man.

2058. Children's videos in basement. And working with John Walsh, too. That's a pairing you don't hear about a lot.

2100. And Lynne Cheney's a hero too! No, wait... he's wrapping up.

2102. And the state of the union is strong! Yes! We get it at the end. It was as he had to explain it first, so as not to get laughed out of the room.

Postamble. Nothing on Katrina, like I said. Side-stepped stem cells, too--and that one lost him the Senate, all things considered. Other than that, well, it was better than expected. Iran wasn't amped out of all proportion, but maybe he was just setting the table on that one. The Lebanon talk might be a check our Union's collective ass might be unable to cash. Health care and education? Jury's out. The budget's going to be a fight for the next few months, so you can't take too much out of this speech. In the end, though: he didn't fall flat on his face.

Pre-Webbamble. So the Democratic response is up next. Does he kick it up a notch? Should be interesting.

2115. Everyone come to Jamestown! Woo! And New Orleans! Yes!

2116. Dude has an impressive forehead, btw.

2118. Guy's talking like a normal person, it seems. Except when he extrapolates Andy Jackson to Wall Street.

2120. Show and tell! Worked for Ross Perot, right?

2122. Coming in for withdrawal. Well done, in the way he did it.

2124. "If not, we will show him the way." Kicked some butt there.

G'night. Well, that was mildly interesting. I'm beat. Time to zonk out to the soothing tones of... Chris Matthews? OK. Sleep not coming for a while. But I'm out for now. Later.

The Meter -- Home To A Certain Team

2007-01-22T21:56:00.000-06:00

We here at The Big O are very excited about the Super Bowl. But not this excited:

We try to have a certain sense of perspective, you know. Anyways.

John Warner: 10. Chuck Hagel against the surge? Check. John Warner against the surge? Checkmate. And the State of the Union is twenty-four hours away. Not even Jack Bauer can turn this thing around.

So, is the President going to double down, or issue a mea culpa and backtrack? We all know what the answer is--the chips are already moving in. Tune in tomorrow for a snarktastic State of the Union liveblog.

Speaking of which:

George W. Bush: .33. And the crosstabs are worse.

33% support him, but only half of those--17% of the total--"strongly" support him. So over four in five Americans are questioning this guy.

Right-track / wrong-track? Worst ever for this President, or since the federal government shutdown in late 1995, at 26-70. The last time the right-track number went below 20 was 1992, for the whole year. That's not good.

And neither is this. If the American people want to go in one direction or another, 25 would pick Bush's way, while 57 would go with the Dems in Congress.

And if the President says anything tomorrow night about Americans having to trust him, or anything along those lines? Well... his "honest and trustworthy" numbers are at another all time low: 40 to the good, 57 to the not-so-good.

Meanwhile, Congressional approval is up twelve points from its low point in October, and within striking distance (43-50) of outpacing disapproval. Pelosi's job approval is at 54%--beating Newt's numbers at any point in his four years at the top.

The point? The President says that he doesn't pay attention to polls. He had better start. No time like the present, man.

While I Was Out -- Thanks Coach

2007-01-21T22:33:00.000-06:00

The problem with (a) running a purportedly daily blog while (b) having a real job is that (b) interferes with (a). Such is life here. Things get in the way of posting thoughts. So absences will occur. We don't mean for it to happen, but it happens anyway.

Arizona Cardinals' head coach Dennis Green has a comment on this. Coach?

The President is feeling the same way, I guess, with regard to the Democrats in Congress. The 100 hours are over, with the House Dems going six for six on their plan. (Now to the Senate. Let us hope Robert Byrd is fully napped when the bills are introduced, so he doesn't sleep for a month and let the bills fester.) Other bills have been dropped with regard to the Iraq "everything old is new again" plan.

And now he has to go forth and give to the Congress information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient. And the Congress (or, as one nerdy little kid I knew once once put it, the Congreff) will probably have none of it. (Another liveblog on Tuesday, unless work seriously interferes. Again.)

Oh, and Hillary Clinton is running for President. In other news, it sometimes snows in winter.

(About that kid--the intentional misspelling of "Congress" was repeated numerous times in a term paper, as we had to base our review of the Constitution on the original documents--or, in this case, a photocopy of the original. He got a S.)

The Meter -- Where Did They Dig Him Up?

2007-01-16T22:17:00.000-06:00

So the folks over at Wonkette are all bent out of shape because Rich Little was hired to be the entertainment at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Hey, it can't be cutting edge all of the time. Besides, between Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and Lewis Black, I don't think there is any Daily Show talent that hasn't been tapped for one of these things. John Hodgman? Maybe--but he's too busy being a sick and somewhat lame PC. But still: Rich Little?

Anyway, this is of no importance. It's only good for a two minute snip (if that) on a Sunday network newscast. And anything becomes funny if you're drunk enough--not a problem, I suppose, for snarky bloggers.

Well then.

Tony Snow (and White House flackers): 2. Here's the latest remix on the "oh, yeah?" refrain from the White House:

There's going to be a lot of dissent, we have acknowledged that all along. And, as a matter of fact, it's important to debate this and also to debate the proposition if, as most Democrats who have visited the President and most we've heard from, want to succeed in Iraq, if you think there's an alternative way to do it, you can really help your country by putting it forward.

OK. Here's what should happen. If the President drops a line like this in his State of the Union speech one week from now, the Dems should go up to the Clerk's desk, take the Iraq Study Group report, a report drawn up by Congressional Democrats last year, S.121 (from Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), asking the Secretaries of Defense and State to go back to the drawing board and come up with a "flexible" withdrawal date based on conditions; available through the Library of Congress); S.287 (the Ted Kennedy (D-Mahhss.) bill--dropped on Friday, no text yet from the LoC), whatever embryonic legislation that exists from Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and whoever else that's out there... and just drop it on the desk, right in front of him. Right in the middle of the speech. Hilarity will ensue.

Barack Obama: 5. So you're in! Tell me something that I don't know. (Oh, and while I'm here: thanks for not asking for money in the Christmas card you sent me. Nice of you. Also: love the decor in your pad. Very Frank Lloyd Wright. Sweet.)

David Wu: 2. Here's the thing, Dave. We need America to think that the Democratic Party is actually not populated by insane people. (It would also help America to know that Oregonians as a group are not nuts. A boost to those who don't believe that all 50 states are on board, you know.) A tip: if you ever get the notion again that there are fake Klingons in the White House, keep it to yourself. Many thanks in advance.

(Oh, one more thing: the last guy to reference Star Trek on the House floor is now in jail. Totally unrelated incidents led to his expulsion from the House, of course. But still.)

The Meter -- Or My Name Ain't Nathan Arizona!

2007-01-15T21:32:00.000-06:00

Another slow news day. Martin Luther King honored, L.A. fake blowed up on 24 (nice knowing you guys), L.A. real blowed up by Sacha Baron Cohen (ah, the nice, wholesome, Golden Globes... how, oh how, will they recover). But the show must go on!

[P.S.: other Coen Brothers quotes will feature here from time to time. You don't like it? Tough.]

George W. Bush: 1. My God. No matter what Congress does, he will do exactly what he wants:

Congress cannot reverse last week's decision to send 21,000 more troops to Iraq, President Bush said in an interview intended to rally popular support for his plan.

"Frankly, that's not their responsibility," Bush said in an interview on the CBS News program "60 Minutes," which aired Sunday.

That's not their responsibility. So only he, in his own mind at least, has the power to stop this thing. Unchecked power sucks, man.

Barbara Boxer: 1. Back in the day, when I lived in California, I actually voted for her. Too bad, then, that she turns out to be a blowhard:

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, took the opportunity to point out that Rice, with no children of her own, will not feel the loss of a son or daughter in Iraq.

"Who pays the price?" Boxer asked Rice. "I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young. You're not going to pay a personal price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families ... not me, not you."

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the end of the feminist movement. A liberated woman who has no kids, and also happens to be a Republican, is accused by a social liberal of not knowing the price of policy because she doesn't have kids.

With all due respect, Sen. Boxer: STFU.

(Let us not let Condi off the hook just yet. It's not that she doesn't know the cost of war because she doesn't have children. The problem with her is that she knows the price, knows it outstrips the benefits, and does not correct course.)

Spanning The Globe To Bring You The Constant Variety of WAAAAA?

2007-01-13T11:12:00.000-06:00

Travels through the Internets brought me a couple of stories from the Guardian in the last week, among other things. Both disturbing in their own way. But first, a story from the BBC.

Road Trip. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad--who is still too cool to wear a tie when he goes out in public--is paying a visit with Hugo Chavez and other lefty Latin American leaders who hate Washington's guts. Now, I like Hugo. He seems like just a regular Jose to me. And Evo Morales in Bolivia, too. But when Hugo gets himself tied to Ahmadinejad, it just seems that Mahmoud is playing him to provoke something with the Bush administration.

Politically speaking, I can't see a whole lot of similarities--Hugo's a populist and a socialist, while Mahmoud impresses me as more of a state-control kind of guy (particularly with the religious leaders that still are at the top of the Tehran food chain). But they both got oil, and they know how to use it to scare / piss off the administration. And given what Bush said earlier this week, the White House is just looking for an excuse to pop Mahmoud in the nose. So Ahmadinejad is either really clever, or too clever by half. I don't know just yet.

Racist Ballerina w/ Multiculti Boyfriend. Simone Clarke -- who, despite being a top dancer with the English National Ballet and also being moderately attractive, is two e's away from being a really tweedy Englishman, complete with shepard's cap, a pipe and a potbelly -- was recently revealed to be a top supporter of the British National Party. Which is no big deal, except that the BNP is the far-right loony fringe in British politics. They used to be a bunch of racist skinhead thugs, but are now a bunch of middle-class, football watching thugs who have absolutely positively nothing at all whatsover to do with racist ideology.

[Phone rings.] Uh, excuse me.

[Hello? Yes. Yes. Oh. Oh, I see. Yeah. Yes. Oh. Right--good to know. Thanks, eh? Bye.]

It turns out they are still just a bit racist, according to a Guardian writer who infiltrated into the organization:

After talking about my "work for the government", Steve turned to the question of police surveillance. "The police will watch leading members, of course, but they can't watch everybody who joins. They're too busy watching Islamic terrorists these days. And it's no secret that most police officers probably support us. Certainly those working in central London know the problems we face ..."

The problems we face. I heard phrases like this uttered by BNP members many times and, after several months, came to understand their precise, nuanced meanings. "Nice areas" I quickly understood to signify predominantly white areas. "Quiet areas" are places where black and minority ethnic people live, but keep a low profile, and don't compete too hard for jobs, school places or sexual partners. "Troublesome areas" are places where black people do just the opposite. "No-go areas" are places where black and minority ethnic people are in a majority. "Ethnics" speaks for itself, as does "our people". And "the problems we face"? They are, quite simply, that there are black people living among us whites.

In my seven months as a party member I heard very few racist epithets, and no anti-semitic comments. Such language appears almost to be frowned upon in Griffin's post-makeover BNP. Perhaps it is a tribute to the Race Relations Act 1976 and the Public Order Act 1986, and to the gently shifting mores of British life, that racists rarely feel able to express themselves, even among like-minded people. But some of the fear and the hatred remains: it just emerges in code.

One of the goosesteppers has been known to be a swan from time to time. This would be Ms. Clarke. As she got ready for a new production, she had to deal with protests outside the theater (and, on the day of her first matinee performance, inside, which she reportedly handled with aplomb).

But this story goes funhouse-mirror on us when we learn that her lover is a Cuban-Chinese immigrant. This raised an undoubtedly furry eyebrow from a cohort:

Clarke attracted a high-profile supporter to the performance in the shape of Richard Barnbrook, BNP councillor for Barking and Dagenham. "I don't normally go to the ballet but I'm going to support Simone Clarke. I'm supporting her freedom of expression."

He said of the demonstrators: "They have a democratic right to protest and the right to oppose us.

"But I find it really rather crude of them to take somebody who is a professional ballet dancer and say 'You haven't got the right to do the job you're doing'.

"They are trying to get her sacked for one simple reason: her standing up for common sense and saying she doesn't support the Government.

"She's not racist - she's going out with someone who is not of her own race."

Mr Barnbrook claimed to have no objection to Clarke's relationship with Cuban-Chinese partner Yat-Sen Chang. "He works, he pays his taxes, he pays his dues, he has as much right to be here as anyone else," he said. However, he hoped the couple would not have children."I'm not opposed to mixed marriages but their children are washing out the identity of this country's indigenous people," he explained, quickly adding: "That's my view, it's not the party's view."

Nice backpeal there, Dick.

"Little Mosque on the Prairie." Also from the Guardian: a story about a new sitcom in Canada. Unconventional, to say the least:

The humour (and situations) are firmly post-9/11. The episode begins with the clean-cut lawyer-turned-imam Amaar queuing for his flight to the prairies as his mother calls to try and persuade him to stay.

"Don't put dad on. I've been planning this for months, it's not like I've dropped a bomb on him. If dad thinks this is suicide, so be it. This is Allah's plan for me."

An alarmed woman in front decides not to fly. Soon after a police officer pulls Amaar out of the queue. In police custody he attempts to explain he was joking. "Muslims around the world are known for their sense of humour," he says. "I did not know that," says the police officer, completely straight. "That was another joke," the imam fruitlessly explains.

Other than that, the situations explore the comedy of a city dweller out of his natural environment ("You don't make cappuccino? What am I doing here?") and the standard sitcom fare of misunderstanding and rivalries - in this case both between Muslims and Mercy's Muslim and non-Muslim residents. It's not the sharpest, most innovative, comedy you'll ever see, but that does not mean lines such as "It's not Canadian Idol they hate ... it's freedom" fail to raise a smile.

The pilot (embedded in the story) is, well, funny, but somewhat self-important. Of course, they have a high bar to surpass, what with the standard set by those Canucks par excellence, Bob & Doug McKenzie. Kooooo-loo-koo-koo-koo-koo-koo-koo!

David Beckham. He's going to make $50 million a year, in a sport that still won't get any ratings here in the States--at least, not after the novelty wears off. Yeah. This is going to work really well.

Damned Ikea couch! Why are you so comfy?

2007-01-12T09:10:00.000-06:00

Sorry folks. For the week, it is Sleep 2, Blogging 0. Work's been like that. And probably no post tonight, as me and the SO are going to a show in Lakeview. Emily Haines, minus the rest of the Toronto Sound Machine (doing business as Broken Social Scene). Saturday will be a good day for posting, I figure.

In the meantime, why don't you send your mom some flowers?

Liveblog Special -- The Bush Iraq (Wrong) Address

2007-01-10T19:13:00.000-06:00

Preamble: The intrepid folks at Wonkette, fake name and all, got their mitts on the White House's press release / talking points, released this afternoon. And, boy, are we set up for a mindfuck tonight, ladies and gentlemen! Here are some of the key points of the plan, per that release:

The New Way Forward In Iraq

The President’s New Iraq Strategy Is Rooted In Six Fundamental Elements:

1. Let the Iraqis lead;
2. Help Iraqis protect the population;
3. Isolate extremists;
4. Create space for political progress;
5. Diversify political and economic efforts; and
6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach.

Bush GW: 0-5; 2 K, BB. I mean, it sure is a "regional approach," isn't it? Beyond that? The Iraqis can't even get a hanging in without there being sectarian bullshit, we've been helping the Iraqis protect the population to wondrous effect over the last few years, extremists are rolling, and Iraqi pols can't go more than fifty yards before they get shot at. I mean, wow.

And the details are filled with never-gonna-happens. For example:

Work with additional Coalition help to regain control of the capital and protect the Iraqi population.

"OK. Everybody left in the Coalition--hey, Poland, where you going? C'mon, sit down for a sec. Right. We need more people to go into Baghdad. We promise you won't get shot at. Much. Any takers? Anybody? Not all at once."

And then there are these equally fanciful doozies:

Increase efforts to support tribes willing to help Iraqis fight Al Qaeda in Anbar.

Yeah. This worked really well in Afghanistan. (Or, I should say, would have, if we had kept the pressure on things there and not let the Taliban recover.) Even money that any said tribes become turncoats within a year.

Key Elements Of The New Approach: Political

[snip]

All Iraqi leaders support reconciliation.

Moderate coalition emerges as strong base of support for unity government.

Oh for Pete's sake. "All Iraqi leaders support reconciliation?" The Shiites are running the show, the Kurds are running their own show, and the Sunnis are running for cover. If you can see a moderate coalition running Iraq with any kind of coherence and competence, then you should quit your job and take over for the horoscope columnists (who sucked on today's predictions--they said bad day, I got a raise).

---

So what can we gather from this? Tonight is going to be a shell game--but Bush is probably going to suck at it so hard that the American people will know where the ball is at all times.

Post-preamble: Rich Lowry over at the National Review comes in with this wish, inter alia:

He should have some pretty strong words for Iran and Syria.

OK. He's on crack. If Iran and Syria start something, what in God's name could we do at this point? Any sane conservatives out there? Oddly enough, one of the far-righties, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), turned today. Per Andrew Sullivan:

I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer. Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution. In the last two days, I have met with Prime Minister Maliki, with two deputy presidents and the president of the Kurdish region. I came away from these meetings convinced that the United States should not increase its involvement until Sunnis and Shi'a are more willing to cooperate with each other instead of shooting at each other.

Well then.

Well that was unexpected: Per MSNBC (TV, no link sadly, and thus no direct quote), the President will say that any mistakes that were made rest with him. That's interesting. The heads analyzing on the fly are supposing that the GOPers that abandoned the President (including Brownback, Collins, Coleman, and perhaps others) pushed his hand.

Kickoff is in a minute: are we going to get body / actual language that says "chastened," or "I hear you," or "screw you all?" Kick back and relax, guys.

2001 (CST): Katie Couric says that this is "his most important speech ever." Three words: bring back Schieffer.

2004: The President is talking about stuff that could happen. Sorry--it's happening now. And now a 9-11 / Iraq reference. Great.

2006: It's not just Baghdad and environs. We've lost a couple of outer provinces too. But anyway. He's now dictating policy to the Iraqi government. And saying the Iraqi goverment is going to do this--he apparently has faith in them. Uh-huh.

2010: Americans will have the green light to go into the hood, and Iraqis will cover us. What about this says "what the hell are you thinking?" And gaining trust from the people of Baghdad turns on (a) what part of town you're in, and (b) which brand of Islam you subscribe to. I don't know about this.

2012: Training of Iraqi troops is just about the only thing that makes sense at this point, if we are going to stick around. Other than that: a washout so far.

2013: Now he gets to Anbar province, where "we are protecting the local population." Not that it shows or anything. 4,000 more troops for this? And that would defeat al-Qaeda in Anbar?

2015: Rich Lowry called it -- Iran and Syria are getting it now. They might stick out their tongue at that one, but give it no further thought.

2016: Getting Arab states to help us? That seems like a gimmick play to me--wonderful if it comes through, but really dicey in the execution. Boise State got the miracle this year; could we get a second one here?

2018: "Democracy fighting for its life." And "bloody and violent" year ahead--a hedge, that. Oh: "no surrender on a battleship." They were talking about this pre-game, how this militates against that whole "mission accomplished" thing.

2019: "Phased withdrawal" equals total disaster. As opposed to moderately-bad disaster, which is what we have now, I guess. Scrutiny is welcome, he says. Lieberman gets a mention--that wasn't an accident, I figure.

2021: "Talented civilians." Does that sound like a bunch of contractors? Pass.

2022: Softlight now on the troops, so it looks like he's winding up.

2023: "The author of liberty." Which is to say the Big Fella, who is getting tired of this shit, just as we are.

Postamble: Same old shit, really. We waited since the election for this turn around, and we got just about what we expected--not much, in the end.

Post-postamble: The Iranians hold a lot of keys here, don't they? If they push, they can make things even worse than they are now. They can't do it openly, but they can cause a lot of trouble just under the surface.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) is on now, calling it what Bush wouldn't: a civil war, based on "fourteen centuries" of conflict. Time for Iraqis to "stand and defend their own nation." Can they do it? Maybe not. Can we? It shows, doesn't it?

Well, that's it. I need a drink, and there's nothing useful in the fridge. Night, all.

The Meter -- Will Not Be Seen Tonight...

2007-01-09T23:08:00.000-06:00

...so that your humble author can get some extra sleep. (As the President's speech is sure to sap energy from the great ribbon of energy that provides all beings with life and happiness, I am going to need a little bit more shut-eye.)

Not much happened today, anyway--everyone sat around, waiting for the pearls of wisdom to drop from, well, somebody's mouth. (In this regard, Ted Kennedy had a goodish day, though one doubts whether his proposal is going anywhere fast, regardless of whether or not he's right.) Oh, and apparently we decided to bomb another country, and nobody really noticed. (The BBC had it as its third "other story" as of last check--that iPhone thing got bigger play. Doesn't make much sense to me, really. Steve Jobs has a new gizmo. BFD.)

But no Meter tonight. Apologies. It will return (with possible liveblog?) tomorrow.

Really Open Swim!

2007-01-08T21:07:00.000-06:00

OK. I was being a wee bit paranoid about the commenting thing. No moderation--comment away everyone! A return to moderation will be forthcoming, however, if it gets out of hand, in my exclusive opinion. (For example, if you decide to spam about your favorite pet project, expect a crackdown. Or, barring that, sarcastic ridicule. (Take this comment string, on some weed-induced cause celebre known as the Borgen Project, from Wonkette as a warning.))

Oh, and this just in: Ohio State is getting their ass handed to them at the moment. Don't know how I feel about that, yet.

The Meter -- Past Interference

2007-01-08T20:28:00.000-06:00

You back for more? OK.

Steny "100 Hour Man" Hoyer: 3. Wow. That five-day work-week thing lasted, well, not one week.

"[Q.] On the Tuesday schedule, I have had one Member come up to me during our discussion and wanted me to ask if there is any possibility that 3 to 4 votes could slip closer to 5 just because of a number of travel concerns that Members have, particularly west coast members.

"Mr. HOYER. We could try. But let me say in all fairness, our original intent was to meet and have votes at 6:30 on Monday. There is a very important event happening Monday night, particularly for those who live in Ohio and Florida."

Good. The business of the nation takes a back seat to a damn football game. And a contrived one too, so as to avoid the logical conclusion of an honest-to-God playoff system and to make the guys in the cream-colored coats happy.

The White House: 2. Cue the barf bags. The President will give his address at 2100 (ET) on Wednesday. What, pray tell, will he do the next day? Tony Snow--hit me, brother!

"Scheduling announcement: The President will travel to Fort Benning, Georgia, on Thursday. He'll visit with troops and make a statement to the press. We'll give you more details as they become available.

"With that, I'll take questions. Terry."

Actually, it's Tom, but thanks. Does the President think this photo-op is going to actually do anything to help his position? Or is it just to boost his ego?

"MR. SNOW: I don't know; ask me in four years -- or maybe two years. What you're asking is -- you're asking a look-back question, rather than a look-forward question --

"Q No, I'm asking you a look-forward question.

"MR. SNOW: Well, but a look-forward question is the President believes it's important to address the situation in Iraq in a manner that he thinks is going to be effective, that's going to make this country, our country, more secure in the war on terror, by addressing violence and uncertainty in the central front in the war on terror. Make no mistake, Iraq is it. Therefore, rather than saying, well, this is the last big speech -- this is the President's proposal for moving forward in a way that he believes is going to be conducive to producing the results."

Reason No. 47 Why Corporatespeak Sucks....

[Snip from press conference real, but taken wildly out of context. Which makes the match-up really freakin' scary.]

Snapshot -- Reason No. 46 Why Corporatespeak Sucks

2007-01-07T15:14:00.000-06:00

While reading this report, per CNN/AP, visualize the face of Ms. Zoraya Suarez, who plays a leading role in this tragedy:

"A Walt Disney World employee dressed as the character Tigger was accused of hitting a child while posing for a photo, a spokeswoman for the theme park said Saturday.

"Park officials temporarily suspended Michael J. Fedelem while they investigate the accusations, Disney spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez said.

"'Naturally, physical altercations between cast members and guests are not tolerated,' Suarez said."

I should say not.

As a lawyer, I can tell you that in my depositions of managers at major corporations, corporate folks go through so many seminars and retreats that they somehow forgot to speak the English language. It just turns into mush. Such as: "Our company, through a team-oriented philosophy, has an ethic of delivering high value and fair dealing in everything that we do." That tells me absolutely nothing.

(Life imitates Bart: the "First Annual Montgomery Burns Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.")

The Week -- Can You Hear Me Now?

2007-01-07T14:12:00.000-06:00

It was a good first two days for the House, I believe. There was much noise from the GOP side about how the new leadership were ramming bills through without consideration. Yet the four bills on the docket next week--approving the 9/11 commission's recommendations, raising the minimum wage, providing for embryonic stem cell research, and making changes to the Medicare prescription drug programs--are by no means new items, seeing the light of day for the very first time just this week. (An argument can be made about holding off on the Medicare changes--those always don't seem to do what you'll think they do, of course.)

Yet all of this is bound to be a sideshow compared to the announcement (date and time TBA) of what the President intends to do now regarding Iraq. Another good move by the Dems here last week, as the letter from Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid on the subject places a clear marker--at last--of where the Democratic Party is going to go with this. (To be sure: there are those on the left who are unsatisfied with the proposal--sooner rather than later is not soon enough for them. That can't be helped--at least now there is a unified (somewhat) message.) The bad news is that perception is reality, and if the GOP can tar the opposition with claims that they are [jarring orchestral chord] not supporting the troops [/chord], then the President may be able to get his surge.

Lot of good it will do him, though. If there is not significant movement in the right direction, in terms of stabilizing things (and, to a great extent, getting the Iraqi government away from sectarian divisions and other nitwittery) in the next six months, then the calls for an immediate withdrawal will gather serious pace. That will take the politics of the nation into a tailspin, as the President will, in all likelihood, ignore them, thus entrenching both sides even further, and making any kind of success, which is now improbable as it is, virtually impossible to reach.

The wildcard in all of this are the impending investigations, which may force the President's hand, if the heat gets too hot, even for him. We shall see.

The Meter -- It's Miller Time!

2007-01-05T23:11:00.000-06:00

You know, this was the wrong week to start a blog. Work was hell. I'm beat. But, with the Congress back in Democratic hands--let's call it a soft landing.

(Yes. This was also the wrong week to stop sniffing glue. You don't need to tell me that.)

That whole "the President's reading your mail" business: 5. Maybe I'm becoming desensitized to the domestic spying programs thing. But at least I have an answer as to why the post office took over a week to deliver Christmas cards to me. True: one card I got on December twenty-freaking-eighth was postmarked on December 15. Now I have a reason. It's nice to have an explanation.

The new bosses in the Congress: 9. Pelosi & Reid To Bush: Drop Dead. The New York Daily News has to make that their headline tomorrow. It would be apropos, and would be personally appreciated--I have Jerry Ford Withdrawal Syndrome. (There's gotta be a pill for that, right?)

Condi Rice: 4. Meanwhile, another warning has been issued to North Korea. When asked for comment, Kim Jong-Il said: "Wait, someone's asking me to comment? That never happens! Who let that fishwrap hack in here? GUARDS!!" Then he turned and went for another brandy. (Lucky for him, he has the last working sideboard in the entire nation. That must be handy.)

Sidebar: Who would have thought that working the DMZ, facing a fanatical nuclear enemy, would become one of the plushest jobs for your average Army infantryman?

"You can go and serve your country in Iraq, or Afghanistan. Or you can be assigned to a fence where you stare at a guy across the fence for twelve hours and then go home. So, do you want to be assigned to Kor--"

"Yes."

[Wait. Oh, I'm sorry. I have just been informed that the plushest job in the Army is working security at the Inn at Schofield Barracks, centrally located on the island of Oahu, close to the relaxing beaches and surrounded by natural beauty. You will be welcomed with the spirit of "Aloha!" And hundreds of the finest and most satisfied Army personnel you will ever hope to meet.]

Open Swim!

2007-01-04T23:18:00.000-06:00

OK--we are going to see how this goes. Comment box is open, but moderated. Keep it clean, kids.

The Meter -- Below the Fold

2007-01-04T22:44:00.000-06:00

Man, twelve-hour days suck. You don't know where you are for a while, but you do know that you shouldn't be at work. Ugh.

Anyways: it was too big a day to go through and hand out marks for the usual suspects. Nancy Pelosi? Yay. Harry Reid? Yay. Robert Byrd? Yay--and drink all the Red Bull you can get your mitts on. [Hat tip, again, to Wonkette.] Haters, like the folks at RedState, who still think that red-baiting is funny? Boo. So let's go off the board, with something incredibly boring--yet telling!

David Dreier: 3. He used to be king of the sandbox--chairman of the Rules Committee, gatekeeper for every single piece of litigation that went through the House. Now? The dude (R-Cal.) is not happy.

Thing is that he's got a beef, to a point. H.Res. 6, the package of House rules that was debated today (and will be tomorrow) includes a provision that fast-tracks four bills, moving them around the normal committee process and blocking amendments. The bills: implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, raising the minimum wage, promoting embyronic stem cell research, and allowing negotation for lower prescription drug prices--all part of the Longest 100 Hours.

Now: Democrats, in the minority, cried foul whenever the GOP pulled stuff like this--dropping bills with only an hour's notice, not allowing amendments on the floor, and so on. And it looks like the Dems are now doing the same thing they decried.

Still, it came across, from Mr. Dreier's lips, as a plainitive whine. And there is a part that rings hollow from his words, as he was the gatekeeper for a Congress widely regarded as one of the worst, in terms of actually getting stuff done, and also for blocking attempts at Dems at getting clean (in their eyes, of course) bills to the floor for an up-or-down vote. Now the Dems are stepping on the gas, and Dreier's screaming bloody murder. It all seems so unconvincing, to me.

Boil it down, and it just sounds like Dreier's pissed that he doesn't run the show now. Understandable--but I'm not going to put the sackcloth on just yet, if you don't mind.

The Meter Extra -- Timeout on the Floor

2007-01-03T23:13:00.000-06:00

Steny Hoyer: 4. The 100 Hour deal was a nice idea. Except that you'll need two damn weeks for a 100 hours, apparently, as opposed to the four-plus days that us mere mortals have. This is going to turn into a damn basketball game if we are not careful.

Fine. We'll give you the two weeks. Deliver, damn it.

The Meter -- Wooooo! Sabbath Rules!

2007-01-03T22:01:00.000-06:00

Pat Robertson: 2. So I guess this means that, if I want to go to Vegas, blow a grand at the craps tables, find some high-class hookers (plural!), and go on a three-day bender, I should get it in before August. Geez, Pat, that's awful helpful of you. Thanks! And I always knew you had a little devil in you. [Hat Tip: Wonkette.]

Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) / Library of Congress: 10. For those of you who have followed this story, apparently it is still going. Usually, when somebody sticks his foot in his mouth, as Virgil Goode (R-Va.) did last month, you get a climbdown in a few days. (See, e.g., Kerry, John.) But yet Goode persists. And so the glorious news comes that Ellison will not only use a copy of the Koran at his (unofficial) swearing-in photo op, but will use one owned long ago by Thomas Jefferson.

Virgil Goode: 0. I believe the Library of Congress has just unpimped your auto.

(In order to atone for resetting the VW commercial, bold prediction time: Virgil Goode will not keep his trap shut tomorrow and will do something stupid, along the lines of prior statements. Perhaps handing out Bibles. Perhaps entering a motion requiring the use of Bibles during the official swearing-in on the House floor. Perhaps holding a Bible aloft has he takes his oath, as a taunt. I may be wrong, but I think I'm going to be closer in my prediction than Pat is on his.)

James S. Robbins: 0. Yo, dude. Rep. Goode doesn't need any help. And yet here you are, helping him:

"The Bashaw of Tripoli’s justification for war on American trading ships in the Mediterranean two hundred years ago, according to Thomas Jefferson, was that 'it was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners.' By all means let Keith Ellison swear in using Jefferson's Koran, maybe afterwards he can look up the passages that discuss smiting the infidels at the neck and make great slaughter among them. Probably underlined."

OK. One last time. Keith Ellison is from Minnesota. The closest thing he has gotten to criminal activity (since moving from Detroit, natch) was being an extra when they shot Fargo. Or maybe on a tour of Paisley Park when somebody gave Prince a hamburger, and he went apeshit.

Look: Minnesota Nice is not a stereotype; it is a way of life. Just try to think of one notable guy from Minnesota who is mean. And not theatrical mean like Jesse Ventura was back in the day. Honest-to-God mean. Minnesota is the home of Spam, Scotch Tape and (insofar as the U.S. is concerned) curling. Curling, for God's sake--as bland and unoffensive as it gets.

Point is: get off Ellison. Let him have a nice first day, because the next two years, as a House freshman, are going to be painful.

The Meter Extra -- Like the Fourth of July

2007-01-02T22:16:00.000-06:00

Just two more, and eschewing the 0-10 scale for reasons that will become obvious:

Keith Olbermann: 212. Dude can boil water just by looking at it. Other people get angry on TV. He gets angry on TV and, in the process, lands it. Stay pissed, man. We love it.

Technorati: *********. Those guys have something going. But they asked me for my password. Sorry, suckers--you are not gonna get it. But, just to show that I ain't mad at you, I am plugging you (and at the same time, me, through my out-of-the-oven Technorati Profile).

The Meter -- Say "Isthmus" Five Times Fast

2007-01-02T18:34:00.000-06:00

More Meter for you--because we care. (And because long-form commentary is out for the night. Sorry.)

Surging: 0.5. So help me, George W. Bush has to get himself a clue. More troops? And if the BBC is right, the theme of the announcement (due next weekish) will be "sacrifice." This, when the toll passed 3,000 just this week. Let us hope this is just a check-swing.

Matthew Rothschild: 1. This guy has no off-switch. He ought to find one.

"Sorry, but I refuse to let my tear ducts open over the death of Gerald Ford.

"There’s something profoundly undemocratic and vaguely medieval about the almost mandatory salutes that we, the people, are supposed to offer when a former President dies. The niceties of custom all too often reinforce the habits of blind obedience to the unworthy wielders of power.

"Say no ill of the dead, we are told. Hogwash...."

And then he goes into why the pardon was unnecessary--which is fine, I guess. But it could wait. There is an excoriation of his domestic policy. Again: fine, can wait. He then makes a statement that is worth making:

"On foreign policy, Ford was damnable.

"He fronted for Pinochet in Chile, and kept aid flowing to that vicious strongman.

"And on December 6, 1975, Ford and Henry Kissinger flew to Jakarta to meet with dictator Suharto and to give him a green light to invade East Timor. Suharto’s invasion and occupation cost the lives of 200,000 Timorese.

"But never mind. We’re not supposed to remember those things. Just that Jerry Ford was such a nice guy."

It's worth saying. But for Christ's sake--the body is still warm. Could you give it a rest for a week? Better: sit down, write a book, and let the story be told in full, instead of taking a potshot while his family greives.

So he allowed East Timor to happen. Point taken. Oh, and you're a dick.

John Nichols: 9. Now see, Matt? This is how you do it. Give credit where it is due. It's not that hard:

"While presidents are afforded the authority to grant pardons, it is certainly reasonable to disagree with the decision to clear Richard Nixon before Congress and the courts were done with him.

"It is impossible, however, for anyone who cares about the right working of the federal government to disagree with what Ford did next.

"After he pardoned Nixon "for all offenses against the United States which he... has committed or may have committed or taken part in" while his disgraced predecessor occupied the Oval Office, the 38th president voluntarily appeared before a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee to testify under oath regarding his decision.

"Contrast Ford's respect for Congress with the belligerent disregard for the institution shown by members of the current administration. Vice President Cheney, Ford's former White House chief of staff, has been particularly foul – not to mention foul-mouthed – in his rejection of congressional oversight."

"Eternal Father" (hymn): 10. You can argue that there is a better hymn to sing at a state funeral. You would be wrong. Chills. (Though the sung Lord's Prayer was not at all bad.)

Massachusetts Legislature: 5. I'm not opposed to letting the people of the Commonwealth have their say on gay marriage, so long as they allow it. I would have preferred it if the Legislature had stopped the move to a referendum. Still, the good guys had a sizable majority--134 to 62. Reason for hope, perhaps.

Little Green Men: 0. So that's why O'Hare is unable to function as a metropolitan airport. But, credit where credit is due--this was funny:

"At least one O'Hare controller, union official Craig Burzych, was amused by it all.

"'To fly 7 million light years to O'Hare and then have to turn around and go home because your gate was occupied is simply unacceptable,' he said."

The Meter Extra -- Memo to Sooners

2007-01-01T21:37:00.000-06:00

The University of Oklahoma Marching Band: 3. Just saw them during the halftime show. They were playing "Bohemian Rhapsody." Badly. But somebody forgot to tell The Pride of Oklahoma that Freddie Mercury was, well, a queen. Somewhere, Tom Coburn is softly weeping, for no good reason. (Score subject to change. If they change their name to University of Oklahomo Marching Band, they go to 10 for sheer style points.)

The Meter -- Tournament Of Noses

2007-01-01T18:20:00.000-06:00

The rules are simple. Ratings from zero to ten. Ten, good. Zero, bad. Five, right down the middle. Ready? Go!

George W. Bush: 2. Nice to see you get back from vacation, eh? Come on: state funeral outside the U.S. means that Cheney shows up. State funeral within the U.S. means that you show up. Period.

Nancy Pelosi: 2.1. You too, ma'am. Betty Ford flew from California, and she has thirty years on you. You get a little bit of extra consideration only because you would have had to fly commercial, which apparently is a bit of a mess at the moment. But, then again, there are direct flights from San Francisco to D.C.

Gerald Ford: 8. Good news: your death has reminded everybody that you can be decent with each other and still operate politically. Bad news: you aren't around to kick everybody in the ass when they don't. And if there are people who deserve ass-kickings, it is this crowd. Sorry to see you go.

110th Congress: 10. You go in with the goodwill of the nation. You want to get stuff done in the first 100 hours. We are going to be charitable and give you a full week. And then we go in with the dogs. The clock starts Wednesday at noon. Be careful.

Eliot Spitzer: 7. Day One, everything changes. OK. So you signed a bunch of executive orders taking on nonsensical stuff going on in the Executive Branch. The problem with Albany is the legislature. Good luck in changing them. [And your inaugration ball is headlined by (excuse me) James Taylor, Natalie Merchant and Ben Vereen. They are gonna have to chain you down if you keep on like this. You are a wild man!]

People who are convinced that The Big Fella is coming back this year: 5 (to 1). Some people who responded to an AP poll forgot to eat their Wheaties, apparently. One in four Americans believe that it is "likely that Jesus will return in 2007." Evangelicals are, obviously, more insistent; just under half say that it is at least "somewhat" likely; one in five say it's "very" likely. The way I figure it, these numbers are pretty static over time; the same folks who predicted the End of Days this year probably have said the same thing for years, and decades. So, it's money-where-your-mouth-is time. I am taking bets--at a very favorable 5:1, given the national breakdown of 3:1 against. (Beauty part: if He doesn't show by the end of the year, I get rich. Fools and their money are soon parted, of course. If He does show up, then the faithful will be so overcome that they forget to collect their winnings. I can't lose!) A fiver a play, guys. I say Jesus doesn't show. Pony up.

War on Christmas Warriors: $2.99. The secular progressives hadn't stopped Christmas from coming! It came! Somehow or other, it came just the same! And all the blowhards! They all began to wear frowns. And the snark-attackers exclaimed, "see you next year, clowns." [But, for the love of God: wait until Thanksgiving next year. Let the end of the creeping holiday season begin with you.]

No, really--what the hell is this?

2007-01-01T17:54:00.000-06:00

I promised a longer-form mission statement before Christmas. But this is going to be short and sweet. There is football to watch.

What I intend to provide here is an analysis of the day's political news. This will make me unique in no way whatsoever; there are hundreds of dead-tree columnists, and thousands upon thousands in the blogosphere, who do the same damn thing. (I reserve the right to link to them from time to time, of course.) But the aim here is to add another log to the pile. If you agree with my conclusions, you get that momentary boost as your opinions are validated. If you don't, steam comes out of your ears as what I have said, regardless of whether you are moved to change your mind. Everybody's happy.

I will try to be fair to all sides here, but it bears saying here that I am a middle-of-the-road liberal--well to the left of, say, Joe Lieberman, but well to the right of the those who would not be happy unless and until the President is put into the stocks and pelted with rotten fruit.

There may be bullet points, or longer-form articles, entirely dependent on the time I have. (Unlike some political bloggers, I have a real job--I'm an attorney in Chicago.) The post will come at the end of the day, after everybody on the planet has had a swing at the pinata. So it will be a highlights show, if you will.

Comments are currently down--I'll open it up to the floor later to see what kind of response there is, if the number of vistors exceeds, say, ten. If nobody reads the thing, we'll shut it down--no point to adding to the discourse if I am just discoursing with myself. The e-mail address can be used at any time, of course.

All right. Lets get on with it.

What The Hell Is This?

2006-12-21T19:18:00.000-06:00

This blog is under construction. Which is a way of saying that I am still thinking about what will go in this space, eventually. I plan on a full launch on 1 January 2007, when a longer-form mission for this--one of oh, maybe 50 billion blogs out there--will be published. Success is by no means assured. But the first step of perhaps thousands has been taken. No turning back now.

One main point to get clear first. The name--almost unpronouncable for people outside the Midwest--does not imply any connection to the town of the same name, situated on the extreme edges of the Milwaukee metropolitan area. In thinking about what this blog will soon be, I thought of some of the greats of the political writing business. There's Publius and Brutus and Poor Richard of the Revolutionary Era. Plato wrote in the name of, and in honor of, Socrates. Eric Blair wrote as George Orwell. And of course, Dear Abby.

So, I thought about it. And there it was. Oconomowoc. Who he is, and what he stands for, will become clear enough, soon enough.

In the meantime, though, happy holidays to you all. (Yes. I am taking the politically incorrect move of denying the existence of the War on Christmas. You don't like it? Too bad, too sad.)