Category Archives: politics

Bonjour, Mes Reves!

Posted on by under politics, review

I awoke to find a very cool review and SF reading plug from the one of my favorite roguish writers, Thomas Roche, for Sins in my mailbox, sent by . He writes:

“Sins of the Sirens is the third release from John Everson’s Dark Arts Books, a small press specializing in horror. Featuring the talents of Morbid Curiosity publisher Loren Rhoads, Mehitobel Wilson, and Money Shot author Christa Faust as well as Eros Zine contributor Maria Alexander, it’s an unhealthy dose of fourteen dangerous tales of dark desire. Featuring both reprints and originals, it collects three to four of the best horror stories from each of these members of the horror-noir-goth underground,each one laced with liberal doses of eroticism and a sucker-punch of wicked imagination.”

Just what I needed after a night of vivid, especially wild dreams that left me ragged.

****

And in the car on the way to work, I called Waxman, Boxer and Feinstein to urge them all to use their Superdelegate votes to support the will of the people — that is, the popular vote. Waxman’s office was sweet as usual. Boxer’s voicemail was on. They’re both uncommitted in the Superdelegate race. And Feinstein’s office, while open, was immediately defensive. As soon as I said, “I know the Senator is using her Superdelegate vote to support Clinton, but…” the guy cut me off and said, “We can’t discuss campaign issues on the phone.”

“But this isn’t exactly a campaign issue. This is a broader comment.”

“Oh?”

“Yes,” I continued. “I’d simply like to encourage Senator Feinstein, when it comes down to the wire, to use her Superdelegate vote in support of whoever has the popular vote, be it Clinton or Obama.”

“Oh, okay,” he said. He sounded vastly relieved. “It’s just that we get a lot of calls from people wanting to debate her position.”

I’m thinking we totally have the right to challenge her, but I don’t say it. “Well, thank you for taking my comment. That’s really all I’m asking for.”

“Okay. Thank you for calling.”

When did we not have the right to call and challenge our Senator’s position on campaign issues? This is disturbing. I understand not wanting to sit on the phone and argue with someone, but I have the right to call and say, “Please support someone else.” Maybe they think it’s separate from her position as my Senator. However, she wouldn’t even be a Superdelegate if she wasn’t my Senator, if I hadn’t voted her in. Geesh.

Gaga Vader and Other Pariah

Posted on by under darth vader, politics

The only way to start the week is with NPR talking about my favorite masked man of all time. Thanks for the belated Valentine, NPR!

Speaking of insane attractions, The Frenchman and I watched an amazing documentary called Crazy Love this weekend that left me with my jaw dragging on the carpet. Holy shit, what a nightmarish couple. Early on I kept wondering why didn’t she sue him for personal injury. That would have given her the money she needed. But then, by the documentary’s conclusion my question was answered: both people are clearly certifiable.

Very little writing happened this weekend for reasons that escape me — probably because I was wrapped up in all kinds of correspondence — but much love happened and the writing did resume last night at last. And, to end the Bengal debate, The Frenchman found a very silly video that features three Bengals, two of which look almost exactly like Robie. He then went on to unearth a jillion Bengal videos and a great article on play aggression that mainly managed to affirm everything our friend Lisa has been saying. (We’re working on it! Honest!)

As we all gear up for ObamaDay tomorrow — er, I mean the next round of primaries and the Hawaii caucus — do read the brilliant (and infuriating) article entitled, “Christianizing America” by the columnist for The Villiage Voice and The Washington Post, Nat Hentoff.

Amid the hostile stirrings in the audience, I also told them to check out Article VI, Section 3: “. . . no religious test shall ever be required as Qualification to any Office of public Trust under the United States.” For the rest of the day, I was the pariah in the room.

Of that I have no doubt.

Yesterday, All My Troubles

Posted on by under BBC, politics

I had some email with Ros, the producer of the WHYS show, and expressed my disappointment with how they chose the flow. He apologized for not coming back to me, but really felt okay with letting the young girl speak as much as she did.

After I’d slept on it, I realized that part of the problem is that I’m really sensitive to America’s image as being full of naive, ignorant voters who don’t care much for the process. I felt that giving so much airtime to someone who was admittedly naive tapped into that nervousness and self-consciousness, especially after experiencing the stereotypes of the French about us. Living abroad can really affect your sensitivity to how you and your home is perceived. Since the WHYS audience is enormous and global, I had hoped to show the world we weren’t all scratching our voting cards with green ink.

Of course, I expressed this to Ros.

I’ve been pulled back into the ad agency project, but that should soon be over. I’m really glad for it, too, because of the bills I’ve generated with Mad-ame Scientist. But the moment I’m done, I’m back to writing for Thrilled! When I’m on, I’m writing about 500 good words a night, which isn’t bad after an exhausting day here.

Speaking of here…

Me and the Beeb (and It Was Soooo Exciting!)

Posted on by under BBC, politics

So, I did get to participate in the talk today, but only early on. If you want to hear it, just go to the WHYS site and download today’s podcast. (You’ll see it easily enough.)

The problem that plagued the last show I was on continues: the guy who is hosting the show now is not very good at balancing the speakers. Today he let a gushing 20-year-old in Minnesota talk three times, but me only once. He interrupted me at one point and then came back saying — to her — “Oh, I’m sorry. I interrupted you.” She had nothing to fucking say except “Oh, it was sooo exciting!” over and over. And over.

Do you want the “opposing view” or not? Do you want a balanced show?

I wrote to Ros, the producer, thanking him for having me again but this time I complained. I don’t mind spreading around the talk with the two radio guests who really had something to contribute. And sure, it’s nice to hear a young voice express some enthusiasm. But to let a young girl with virtually nothing to add speak three times wasn’t their finest moment in programming, especially when I could have contributed information about the French, which would have addressed the actual comments coming in on the blog and SMS about money affecting our democratic process. Or even spoken to other important problems.

And while I have you, I’ll speak to that point: The French hava a law that says every candidate must be given equal time in every medium — radio, TV, newspaper, etc. This keeps the playing field level for poor people who run for office, since they can’t afford TV ads and all that. So what they typically do is hold tons of these town halls and debates to get the candidates on TV and radio. This works because France isn’t nearly as big as the U.S. The candidates can travel around, participate in these town hall discussions and put up political posters.

It doesn’t work for the U.S. because we’re so damned big. We have to have major media to reach everyone. We also have a capitalist society. Making money is part of our culture, but at least it’s transparent (that is, we have to know where the contributions come from).

The part, though, I really wanted to say (knowing that time was short) was that it’s legal here to lie in these media ads. That’s the part that’s so incredibly wrong and broken.

But, gee, I’m glad the world instead knows it was all soooo exciting. Because that was the focus of the show, obviously.

The BBC and Maybe Me

Posted on by under politics

If you can tune into the WHYS, you may (or may not) hear me speaking about American democracy and how effing busted it is in some ways (and how, in other ways, it definitely is not).

At 10:00am Pacific Time, just go to the WHYS site and click the Listen icon in the right-hand menu.

If there’s a podcast, I’ll direct you to it.

Meanwhile, I had to go to bed early because I had an 8:00am meeting this morning with the Advanced Projects artists putting together the “animated” pieces we’re working on. And it’s a good thing because I would have burst a blood vessel if I’d had to see Missouri be uncalled and go to Clinton.

A Letter

Posted on by under blasphemy, politics

Dear Evanglical Leaders,

I hope you noticed God’s Wrath striking the states that nominated your beloved Mike Huckabutt. I hope you’re ready to rain fire and brimstone on the poor unfortunate people who lost their homes and loved ones for supporting your jackass candidate who thinks people with AIDS should be rounded up like cattle and driven into isolation. Condemn, consternate and convict their spirits for the attrocity that is their voting record, while the rest of us sit heartsick for them and send aid.

Or, alternatively, admit your beliefs are unstrained bullshit geysering from Jesus-shaped cranial wounds in your heads.

Sincerely,

A Thinking Person

Stupor Tuesday

Posted on by under politics, skepticism

I know you’re all dying to know what astro-babble The Sweetpea has been contemplating about Stupor Tuesday. We had a work slump yesterday once I finished a ton of copy for Hong Kong, so I’ve been pouring over the charts to see if I can give some predictions that we can compare to what really happens.

I have a major dilemma in what I’m seeing and this happens sometimes when looking at public figures. There’s so much press on Hillary, for example, that I can kind of see what was happening to her in public at various times. For Stupor Tuesday, she has a combination of hugely nasty transits, some of which she also had back in April 2007 (transiting Neptune opposing natal Saturn and squaring natal Mercury). When “regular joes” have this transit, they typically feel like they’ve fucked up their lives in a major way and can’t see how. Now, if we go back in the Google archives to what was happening back then, we see headlines like:

1) She breaks records fundraising, but Obama nearly matches.
2) She tries to get the legislative branches to repeal the act that allowed Bush to take troops into Iraq and fails.
3) She loses major Bill Clinton fundraisers.
4) Corruption rumors plague her from the right.
5) An unauthorized biography is announced for publication in June 2007.
6) She performs well in a Democratic debate.
7) She thanks a coach for standing up to Imus.

If we take the press’ skewed view at face value, it’s not that bad. On balance it’s not any more difficult a month than any other she’s had except for the last two, although there are certainly murmurs of what was to come now with Obama’s rivalry. But if this was someone I didn’t know and had no records of, I’d say, ” You’re going to have a profoundly disappointing day with major, rapid changes in close relationships. You might even meet someone special with whom you fall in love, but your judgment is severely impaired, so, like, DON’T.” To Hillary’s credit, if she’s actually feeling major disappointment and fuckedupedness, she obviously tries to do something about it.

As for Obama, things also look a bit disappointing, but not nearly so. Boy has a bit of Broken Heart Syndrome, in fact (progressed Moon opposite natal Venus) feeling all restrained and stuff in his career (transiting Saturn conjunct natal Pluto in the 10th House). However, he also has this rapid changes in relationships (transiting Uranus trine his ASC), but with the world in general, not just the people close to him. Also, Mercury is going to be Rx then, which affects Hillary a lot more than Obama.

So, the only thing I can conclude is that Stupor Tuesday ain’t gonna settle things they way everyone would like.

Incidentally, as soon as I finished The Damned Proposal and this bit of freelancing for the ad agency, I’m going to contact the IIG and try to set up some kind of formal test, if there’s one we can agree upon. Since a kind skeptic friend assures me that these guys are friendly, I’m happy to do something with them. It’s a great opportunity for me, too, because I’ll get to do the sort of experimentation I’ve always wanted to do. The thing that bothers me about the Randi Challenge is that it’s so incredibly hostile that it clearly lacks objectivity. And it also looks like you’re just in it for the money. Like everyone, I care about money, but I’d do something with the IIG even if they didn’t offer any money. In fact, the same skeptic friend gave me the names of two other objective groups, but it turned out they all closed down their investigative programs. This makes whatever the IIG is doing even more important.

The Upset

Posted on by under politics

So, there was an upset. Bigger than I read, but still an upset.

It was close and it was Hillary’s state, after all. Plus, the Clintons came out and tous les deux began bashing Obama. Very classy. Unfortunately, that works. However, Clinton squandered just about all the respect I had for her.

The thing is, if Obama ever starts really biting back, he’s got the mad skillz with words and there might be nothing left but char where Hillary once stood if he ever gets started on her.

And I think he should.

Speaking of mad skillz, I’m still writing away. Another 1000 words last night. I’m very tired.