The International House of Bacon

Yes, I’m bothered by Obama in a lot of ways, but a good deal of it is, at its root, philosophical differences. As said elsewhere, I don’t doubt that Obama generally has the best interests of the country in mind, but I simply think he’s going about it the wrong way. One of the most major ones that keeps popping up for me is Obama’s protectionism.

The root of the issue comes in the fact that we’re now a global economy. The internet has facilitated it on an individual level, and the ease of which to transport goods and services has made it a basic inevitability among the Western world. The idea of a “domestic economy” is in the past, and those who are still fighting the war against globalization have simply lost.

Unfortunately, at least rhetorically, Obama still appears to be fighting that fight. To his defense, he may have had to - both John Edwards and Hillary Clinton have taken positions against outsourcing and NAFTA, and the misguided idea that free trade is hurting “ordinary Americans” seems to be a pretty solid meme amongst “concerned” Democrats. The problem is that the protectionism simply doesn’t work, hasn’t worked, and is not doable in the current economic atmosphere.

Here are the facts: While Obama and Hillary trade blows about who’s more against NAFTA, they both ignore that unemployment has dropped since NAFTA was implemented. No, correllation does not necessarily mean causation in this case, especially in the tech boom of the 1990s, but there’s something to be said about employment levels improving as trade is opened up on both sides of the border, while protectionist policies like steel tariffs adversely affected the economy..

The position certainly has some place in massaging the xenophobic populace’s straining muscles (how soon we forget the Qatar/port authority flap), but it also has root in the old populist canards of the jobs that Americans are somehow entitled to flying away overseas, or the mythological tax breaks for offshoring, ignoring the facts of the matter for an easy scapegoat in an era of budget deficits. The position is not only pandering, but it’s simply unrealistic.

For one, as Daniel Griswald at Cato notes, the choices to the upcoming President aren’t many - unilateral withdrawal will result in tariffs on our trade, Canada and Mexico aren’t going to be interested in reopening the treaty. So this sort of rhetoric has the double-edged sword of angering our allies (which, I’m told, is bad to do given how Bush has allegedly treated our allies over the last year - not to mention unilateralism in just opting out of the treaty, but that’s beside the point.) and possibly harming our economy in a significant way.

But there’s also the outside chance that Obama’s just trying to get elected anyway. His campaign’s been assuring Canada (and this back-channel communication could be illegal if true) that it’s “just campaign rhetoric not to be taken seriously.” Or not. Maybe. Well, that’s nice in any regard - he may be taking a position that will actively hurt our economy, but that might be all a lie just to get elected, a lie that’s probably hurting our relationships with other countries. How pleasant.

Whichever way you slice it, this is pretty bad news. Especially in a time of a slowing economy, any help we can get should be a positive one, and Obama seems pretty set on looking toward the opposite.

As some of you know, I occasionally blog over at Heretical Ideas, a team blog that an old friend of mine, Tom, has blogged at for a number of years. In partial response to my Obama posts here, he wrote a piece about tactics and the campaign that’s worth your time to read.

To boil down the argument he’s making as I understand it, my position that the more substantive voting bloc should be bothered by Obama’s (at that point) nondescript campaign isn’t really a good one, largely due to the flaws in the primary system and partly because it’s the only way he can say consistent with his self-portrayal as an outsider.

I don’t really disagree with that in theory - I do know why Obama’s run the campaign like he has, and it’s obviously worked for him so far. With that said, there’s something to be said about the essential bait and switch he’s pulling as well, and campaigning on active deception may be a good tactic in a primary candidacy where the scrutiny can be distributed among numerous candidates, but at some point the chickens have to come home to roost.

I’ve spent a not-insignificant amount of time thus far pointing out how that veneer is fading away quickly, where what he says simply fails to match up with what he does. It doesn’t end there, though: He’s hyper-partisan when he claims to be above politics, he’s barely bipartisan when it would allegedly matter most even though he claims an ability to reach across the aisle, etc - when Obama is reaching out to these disenchanted voters by attempting to appeal to them through these sorts of high-minded ideals that he can’t even reach, what happens when the truth comes out?

The problem is compounded by the way Obama phrases issues. Stephen Hayes over at The Wall Street Journal does a great job demonstrating this:

His rhetorical gimmick is simple. When he addresses a contentious issue, Mr. Obama almost always begins his answer with a respectful nod in the direction of the view he is rejecting — a line or two that suggests he understands or perhaps even sympathizes with the concerns of a conservative.

At Cornell College on Dec. 5, for example, a student asked Mr. Obama how his administration would view the Second Amendment. He replied: “There’s a Supreme Court case that’s going to be decided fairly soon about what the Second Amendment means. I taught Constitutional Law for 10 years, so I’ve got my opinion. And my opinion is that the Second Amendment is probably — it is an individual right and not just a right of the militia. That’s what I expect the Supreme Court to rule. I think that’s a fair reading of the text of the Constitution. And so I respect the right of lawful gun owners to hunt, fish, protect their families.”

Then came the pivot:

“Like all rights, though, they are constrained and bound by the needs of the community . . . So when I look at Chicago and 34 Chicago public school students gunned down in a single school year, then I don’t think the Second Amendment prohibits us from taking action and making sure that, for example, ATF can share tracing information about illegal handguns that are used on the streets and track them to the gun dealers to find out — what are you doing?”

In conclusion:

“There is a tradition of gun ownership in this country that can be respected that is not mutually exclusive with making sure that we are shutting down gun traffic that is killing kids on our streets. The argument I have with the NRA is not whether people have the right to bear arms. The problem is they believe any constraint or regulation whatsoever is something that they have to beat back. And I don’t think that’s how most lawful firearms owners think.”

Hayes compares it to the perception of Reagan, but I don’t know if that’s accurate - Obama’s setting up where he wants you to believe his position is - in this case, a respect of the the second amendment - but, in reality, doesn’t really buy into the rights wholesale. When you read Obama’s speeches like this, you see it happen time and time again, and it works great - even I’ve been hoodwinked once or twice by the slight of hand. At what point, however, does someone who’s thinking A but realizing B act on that disconnect.

I think this is where the “policy geeks” should be very concerned. If you’re a policy geek for Obama, it’s because you buy into what he wants to do, or at least think he’ll do it better than the alternatives. Right now, the reason your horse is leading the pack is not because Obama’s got those positions, however - it’s because his rhetorical flourish is exciting people who don’t know about his economic plans or may think he’s actually strong on gun rights. McCain isn’t going to let that slide if he’s a smart campaigner, and I believe he is. If you’re inspired by Obama as a bipartisan reformer, are you going to buy into the bill of goods that Obama can’t reach when that comes out, or the solid and well-known record of McCain that can be easily demonstrated.

When you hitch your apple wagon to a star, there’s a really good chance you’ll get burned. At this point, it might be too late for the policy geeks with Obama.

Look at me, being all pro-active.

Books:

The Somnambulist - Jonathan Barnes: I wanted to love this fantasy/mystery hybrid, but I only liked it, and it left a few too many questions unanswered than conflicts resolved, IMO. It’s a really interesting read, and I can’t say I disliked my time with it, but it felt like a chore a bit too often, which was frustrating. I’d say give it a shot, but be wary.

The Testament of Gideon Mack - James Robertson: Sometimes books are like movies - if they were a hair shorter, they’d be perfect, and this book was one of them. It’s about an atheistic preacher in Scotland who encounters the Devil, and the general reaction to it. The beginning is killer, the middle plods until the juicy bits, and then it sails to the finish line quite nicely, but the fact that I had to sift through 100 pages of stuff that could have been cut in half or more dragged the whole thing down. The worst part is that it’s a neat treatise on the whole “what if an atheist encountered God” question, but in a really unique and different way. It’s worth your time, though.

The Dark Knight Returns - Frank Miller: I’m starting to think I don’t like Frank Miller all that much, although I was annoyed more by the artwork in this one than anything else. I understand how Important this one is, but either it just didn’t do the trick or it’s just that I’ve never much enjoyed the Batman mythology much.

Beginner’s Greek - James Collins: This book achieves the unexpected by presenting the expected. Perfectly written, well-executed, and really a great diversion. I’ve been down on realistic fiction a lot as of late, but this book really did it for me.

Marvel 1602 - Neil Gaiman: Another one that I thought I’d love and simply didn’t. Interestingly, the conceit (Marvel characters in Elizabethan England) was what I struggled with more than anything. I appreciate the effort, I suppose.

Ex-Machina: Fact v. Fiction/Tag - Brian K. Vaughan: I don’t know what I can really say about Ex-Machina without gushing like a schoolgirl. I love everything about it.

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules - Jeff Kinney: That this guy is fast becoming the next big deal in children’s books couldn’t happen to a better human being, and the fact that the books are completely awesome and really capture what it’s like to be a 10 year old boy stumbling through life only helps things more. So fun - every guy my age needs to make it a point to grab these two books and spend an afternoon with them.

Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court - Jan Crawford Greenburg: A really interesting look at how the Court has been assembled post-Roe v. Wade. An essential book in a lot of ways - it made me like Eisenhower less, respect Clarence Thomas more, and put me at peace a bit with John Roberts. I have The Nine sitting in my book bag next, so it’ll be an interesting contrast.

A Drowned Maiden’s Hair - Laura Amy Schlitz: This is one of those books that reminded me that kids books don’t have to be all kiddish to make sense and speak to a certain concept. A child is adopted for the sole purpose of defrauding rich people using seances, and it’s a really strong story with really sympathetic characters. The ending was a bit of a letdown, but only because the ride to get there was so really great. Amanda, I really think you’d enjoy this one if you haven’t seen it yet.

Movies:

There Will Be Blood: Quite simply the best movie from 2007 I saw. I still haven’t seen No Country, but I can’t imagine this not surpassing it. I’m a total Paul Thomas Anderson fanboy, true, but the performances were incredible, and the story really nailed it for me, and it’s really an amazing masterpiece.

Sydney White: I don’t know what’s worse - that I’ve become a complete Amanda Bynes fanboy, or that I really loved this movie a lot. It’s a teen flick at its heart, and it has your typical South Park “I think we all learned something today” ending, but it’s less than 90 minutes long, the pacing is pitch-perfect, it’s funny in all the right places, and it’s just a really great ride. I’m 14 years old.

The Ten: Now, for something I thought would be a lot of fun, but really wasn’t. A kind of goofy series of vignettes inspired by the Ten Commandments, of varying humor and point. That so many good people (Michael Showalter, Paul Rudd, Winona Ryder, etc) were involved and it was this underwhelming was somewhat of a disappointment.

The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters: What a wild documentary, all about a guy who challenges the long-standing record score in Donkey Kong and the internal political strife that goes along with it. Absolutely crazy documentary, the fact that this wasn’t nominated for anything big is criminal, IMO.

Everyone in the Raymond household is various forms of ill and sickly and yeah. Plus, I’m wicked busy, so most of this should have posted last night. Alas…

* The big news, at least amongst folk like me, is the passing of William F. Buckley. I’m much too young to have been directly influenced by him, and I’ve only been reading National Review for the last five years or so, but to consider him anything less than one of the top three figures in modern conservatism (along with Reagan and Goldwater) is probably improper. He made conservatism intellectual again in an era where it was reeling from the disaster of the New Deal and wasting away in McCarthyism. In an era of Bush-administration-style neoconservatism, I’m hoping that someone will be inspired to take up his mantle that WFB’s death brings to the forefront. For a pretty great overview of the importance, Reason pulls it together kind of nicely, and Radley Balko hits a lot of notes that went through my head.

* This is a good example of why I think Obama’s missing the point. And while I give him some minor kudos for his attempt at a response, never mind that he’s likely wrong to some degree on that anyway. Still, Obama’s ridiculous position on it does open up a can of worms - if things go to hell in Iraq once we withdraw, you’re gonna go back in? Yeah, that’ll go over well.

* It’s still way too early for these polls to have any significant meaning, but McCain’s essentially closed the gap in head-to-head polling. Compare McCain going after Obama in the previous piece with Clinton’s anemic “attacks” over the last week - I think Obama’s going to struggle more with McCain than even I previously thought.

* Orin Kerr at the Volokh Conspiracy muses over possible Obama Supreme Court appointments. What’s most telling about this is Obama’s view of the Court: “part of the role of the Court is that it is going to protect people who may be vulnerable in the political process, the outsider, the minority, those who are vulnerable, those who don’t have a lot of clout. . . [S]ometimes we’re only looking at academics or people who’ve been in the [lower] court. If we can find people who have life experience and they understand what it means to be on the outside, what it means to have the system not work for them, that’s the kind of person I want on the Supreme Court.” Uh, no, Mr. Senator. That has nothing to do with the Supreme Court’s role in society. You have no clue what you’re talking about. Can his supporters even defend this ignorance? That he can talk about the Supreme Court in multiple sentences and not mention the Constitution once should really give anyone pause, I think.

* This was a big Obama day for me, sorry: National Review covers one of those odd video collections of Obama on the military and kind of cuts to the chase as to how stupid it sounds to “slow the development of future combat systems.”

* In other news, Obama decides to redefine liberal in order to assert that he isn’t one. I’ve never bought into the “liberal as a dirty word” meme, for what it’s worth.

* How Obama deals with the media. More importantly, what the military thinks of Obama. Remember the howling over Bush allegedly not listening to the military regarding the run-up to Iraq? Do we think Obama’s going to fix that from what we’ve heard so far? Both links from William Katz’s great Urgent Agenda.

* Obama currently has a “hold” in the Senate on one of the Federal Election Commission appointees. Putting aside that this is simply more evidence of Obama equalling “politics as usual,” this would normally not be news except that the FEC is short enough members to produce a quorum, and this is actively harming McCain’s campaign, especially in terms of fundraising. Now, as far as I’m concerned, McCain made his campaign finance bed and he can damn well sleep in it, but there’s something that should feel kind of dirty about this whole thing about the guy running for President using his Senate position to harm his opponent, even if it’s completely (o my knowledge) legal and above-board. Hell, he couldn’t even convince one person to do the hold for him? Still shady.

* I repeat: Barack Obama is the Same Old Washington Politics as Usual. Thanks, Jana. You can’t complain about lobbyist influence while giving the impression that you’re influenced by lobbyists.

* Don Luskin has been one of my favorite economic bloggers for a while now, and I’ll even forgive him for latching onto McCain’s campaign. He wrote a great piece on prediction markets this week that is worth reading.

* Venuzuela introduces food rationing. Because, you know, socialism works, nationalizing the oil companies was a wonderful idea, and Hugo Chavez is to be praised for his wonderful reforms that are improving so many lives.

I’ve gone long enough for now.

…have a new album out. Here’s a link to one of the songs, “Hot Corner,” which I love.

Ann’s not a fan.

Ann: “Is this that band that did “Love Shack” and the song we heard yesterday (”Planet Claire”)?
Jeff: “Yeah!”
Ann: “Oh, God, I hate them. So annoying. That song they did, ‘Stayin’ Alive…’”
Jeff: “Huh?”
Ann: “Oh, no, that’s the Bee Gees! It’s similar, they both have ‘B’.

Later…

Ann: “The B-52s are like the John Waters of music.”
Jeff: “So you think they’re awesome.”
Ann: “No, it’s that they might be awesome, but I just don’t understand them.”

For those of you who can’t understand why I’m hammering home points about Barack Obama, this is why:

Barack Obama has the same number who will definitely vote for him–34%. But, more people are committed to voting against him than McCain. Forty-three percent (43%) say they will definitely reject him at the ballot box. For 18%, their support depends on his opponent.

Obama’s negatives come at a point where he hasn’t even been really truly attacked on any fronts. Some careful criticism of his candidacy and the way he’s running his campaign, but little in the way of an examination of his policies or what he’ll do. The more that people know, the better everyone is.

Hillary Clinton has apparently decided that now is the time to fire on all cylinders, and it might be too late (and too dumb - can you really criticize the foriegn policy experience of Bush when a) you lack experience and b) your husband lacked it as well?), but at least it’s something.

I might actually want to watch the debate tonight…

I’m so happy that the duo for Once won an Oscar last night. I call them “the duo for Once” because I don’t know how to spell Marketa Irgosloveta. See?

* Bookseller has announced the shortlist for oddest book titles.

* Saturday Night Live came back this week - one funny bit with Mike Huckabee, one “would be funnier if it weren’t so true” bit about Obama.

* Is there any piece of populism that Obama won’t embrace? I worked in textbooks for years, it’s no more a racket than any other form of bookselling.

* I loved this story: Minnesota bar patrons become actors in theatrical productions to retain their right to smoke. Any way to poke holes in ridiculous anti-smoking laws, I’ll support.

* Meet the new Florida Marlins cheerleaders: the plus-size male group, The Manatees.

* QandO has an amazing takedown on the ethanol movement. Required reading.

* Barack Obama, funded by corporate interests. Same old Washington politics as usual.

* PowerLine posts the response from Rep. John Shadegg about his changing his mind over retiring following a large groundswell of support for him staying in Congress. I’m pleased.

* Female readers, do you agree that you “wake up every morning wondering how on earth I am going to pull off that next minor miracle to get through the day”? Are you “struggling to keep her head above water?” Exactly how out of touch is Michelle Obama? Do we assume that her husband is this out of sync with the rest of us, too?

Non-political in nature.

1) Rock on, Red Sox. I’m a big Francona fan at this point - hell, he’s only 8-0 in the World Series - and I think he’s the best guy to run what is essentially a very difficult team in a very difficult market. This is where Rick chimes in with Francona’s record in Philly or the 2006 All-Injury All-Stars or something, but I don’t care much. 3 trips to the playoffs with 2 World Series trophies is enough for me to want to see him handed a blank check.

2) ABC plans to air the Wizard’s First Rule television series starting this fall. Talk about weird - the rumors of a television something based around Goodkind’s novels have been floating since at least 2005, and Sam Raimi got involved, and this is apparently a go - 22 episodes based on the first book in the series. I’m a little stunned by it, frankly, and I can’t imagine how they plan on translating what’s essentially 100 pages of S&M into a syndicated program (believe it or not, it’s somewhat important to the plot), but hey. I just hope with Raimi involved, it won’t be too cheesy, but fantasy on film can go so wrong so quickly…

3) So I ended up popping for Team Fortress 2 on PC so I could play with extra maps and not be monopolizing the television 24/7 when I need my fix. I have to say, while being able to use the 360 controller with it works wonders, I still suck. I’m usually pretty good on the 360 matches, but I’m just consistently destroyed by people on the PC. It’s crazy. I do need to get my headset to work better, though. The drivers didn’t make the mic pick up sound any easier, but I’ll figure it out.

More later on.

* Patterico linked to a blog post about reaching across the aisle, as Obama claims he can do. The problem? He hasn’t been one to reach across the aisle when bipartisanship was sexy - he wasn’t part of the Gang of 14, wasn’t part of the immigration process, wasn’t there during the FISA update. Supporters will point to his transparency initiatives, but the fact that very few people noticed them is probably an indicator that they weren’t a big deal, and, more importantly, weren’t “tough” to take politically. I agree with Patterico that the bipartisanship didn’t work out well for us as a nation (and Bush, another bipartisan unity type, is more evidence of this folly), but McCain clearly has the goods on Obama if this is a major selling point for you.

* Also from Patterico: Barack Obama is all about the Same Old Washington Politics. Someone should really Googlebomb that phrase and attach it to a comprehensive Obama listing of all the ways he’s the same old song and dance.

* Reason takes some time with Michelle Obama’s commentary. I don’t really disagree with a word Reason has to say about it. “Easy” is such a broad, subjective term anyway. She should know.

* I ask again: This is the type of heathcare we want? Really?

* It’s like Barack Obama is a three year old, really. Applauding a nose blowing?

* QandO notes the disconnect between treatment of the McCain affair allegation and other interesting allegations in the past. What liberal media, right?

* Washington State Supreme Court rules in favor of government monopoly. So sad.

* The whole “shoot a missile at a spy satellite” thing is pretty neat. Bad Astronomy has a great compilation of links, photos, and video.

* South Korea returned 22 boat people they captured to North Korea. North Korea then executes them. Great job, guys.

Last week, I discussed some basics regarding Obama’s position on economics. Since then, he’s pushed out some more information on what he wants to do economically, and it ain’t pretty.

Let’s review really quick: right now, employment is what’s considered full - hovering around 5% unemployment, may leap up a point between now and the election, which is still decent. The manufacturing sector has been decimated in a number of areas, specifically the Midwest, and we’re hampered in part due to a xenophobic economic policy that has fear of foriegn made goods and irrational hatred of foriegn-based companies and outsourcing. Our corporate tax rate is uncompetitive with other comparable nations, and is only getting worse. To say that the economy is the top issue in this campaign is not a bad thing to say, really.

The first big pitch is that he’s looking to create two new major public works initiatives - one for “green energy,” one for “Infrastructure Reinforcement.” Let’s put one thing out of the way - the idea that the government can create jobs in this way was tried during the Great Depression: it didn’t work. The unemployment rate at the height of the problems in the 1930s was at 25%, and the result before the war issues began to ramp up for the United States was at 17%. Hardly a vast improvement for what it meant to be, and, more importantly, did nothing to help economic prospects and possibly aided in stalling them. Beyond that, what’s “Infrastructure Reinforcement” outside of the same sort of bogus earmark spending that voters overwhelmingly rejected in 2006 and are still considered a big issue today? Obama wants to spend $500b on infrastructure when it’s all said and done - what?! And so he wants a “Green energy sector,” whatever that means - will it mean more food for fuel that only ends up hurting the environment as well as the same poor and middle class he claims to be all about? (The answer, by the way, is yes). To be fair, Obama’s not shutting the door on nuclear power, but he’s hardly willing to pioneer an easy, long-term, viable pitch to our energy woes, either. Instead, it’s more of the same regulation that doesn’t work and ends up hurting the middle class where they can’t afford to be hurt - at least according to Obama’s narrative.

His other big platform piece is health care. His plan is dicey at this point - sometimes he wants universal, sometimes he doesn’t, he doesn’t like the Clinton plan, but his plan will insure all kids, etc. Two things we do know - it won’t work, because we we can’t get people to enroll in the plans provided to them already, and that it’ll cost a lot. Obama himself claimed last year that it would cost up to $65b a year, but if the Massachusetts funding gap is any indication, that number will go way higher.

Of course, that’s not the only way he plans to help people, you know. Tax credits! Increase the Earned Income Tax Credit, refundable credits for college students, savings credits, mortgage credits, tripling the EITC for middle class earners! Of course, Obama wants to close what he considers tax havens and increasing taxes on the top 1% of earners to help pay for these things. The problem, of course, is that the Bush tax cuts, in full, only accounted for roughly $110b/year, and closing the so-called loopholes isn’t going to bridge the gap in his spending proposals any further. You like the deficit spending now? Just wait!

Granted, we all need a tax cut - the taxes we pay right now don’t make sense, and the code is extremely complicated. But when the answer is to get those who create the jobs, invest in companies who create the jobs, and the companies that provide jobs, to pay more taxes, and to knock trade advances (and they are advances) such as NAFTA along the way, that’s not the route to a healthy economy. If you want more jobs, you don’t tell people “I want you to incorporate here, but I’m going to make you pay more money to the government to do it, and, oh, force employers to set up an IRA for you. Oh, and did I mention raising the Social Security cap, which will raise taxes quite a bit more for a number of people in that $100k-500k bracket who aren’t exactly rich, but, depending on where they live, aren’t poor either?

This is a huge error, and, more importantly, contrary to the meme Obama wants to push out there - this is typical Washington politics. This is the same type of politics we’ve seen for 70 years running now - government can solve the problem (even though they can’t) and the way to prosperity is by fleecing those who create it (it’s not). Politics as usual. I’d love to hear some defenses of this, because this seems epic in its proposal stage. He may not get much of it passed, but is that even worth a risk to possibly give that opportunity? I sure don’t think so.

The Bird and the Bee - “Polite Dance Song”: I can’t recall the last time I got into a band in such a convoluted way. Ann’s friend was asking if I knew this one song by The Bird and the Bee sometime last year, and we couldn’t figure out who it was at the time. Fast forward a bit, and I somehow land on the video for this song, which I love, while Ann is in Philly. She comes back with a copy of their album, having not seen my post with the video in it. Later, I learn that the lady in the band is Inara George, who I have a passing interest in due to some sort of link with The Reputation. With that said, it’s really a fun indie pop song with more than a little humor, and the EP it’s on is filled with songs like it. I’m shocked it took me this long to find them, quite frankly.

The Raveonettes - “Aly, Walk With Me”: I’ve loved the Raveonettes ever since Whip It On, and I loved the direction they took with Pretty in Black. The new album is essentially a mix of the clean, 60s-pop-ish sound of the last album with the grit and Spector-esque-ness of their early stuff, and “Aly, Walk With Me” is the first song on the album and sets the tone immediately. It’s a song that kind of grabs you, because you know you’re hearing a Raveonettes song if you’re familiar with them, but it’s different enough to make you wonder what comes next. The song falters only in the way that it’s almost too noisy, even though that was the intent. I can appreciate that, even if it doesn’t always work.

The Motion Sick - “Grace Kelly”: If Colin Meloy and Jeff Mangum had a child, it may sound like The Motion Sick. I tripped up on “Grace Kelly” this week and got completely hooked - good acoustic indie rock with some different instruments and a competent lead singer who’s voice fits the music they’re playing. And they’re local, which is an exciting plus if I ever get around to going to concerts again. They have a bunch of free mp3s up, so it’s worth giving a shot.

* I have lots of reasons to like Mike Lowell, but this doesn’t hurt, either. A class act through and through, he’s the type of guy you want to root for. I’m so excited for this season.

* My conspiracy theory as to why Obama’s largely masking his platform with inspirational quotes that belong on pictures of kittens? the fact that he’s probably the most liberal candidate to come this close to the Presidency in my lifetime. That doesn’t jive with the center.

* I’m glad that the New York Times was able to take some time out of their busy schedule to go after Obama’s economic hypocrisy. Oh, wait, they didn’t - they were too busy implying McCain’s having an affair with a staffer/lobbyist. Bang-up job there, Grey Lady. Great sourcing, too, really.

* Two movie notes:

a) Not a huge fan of Where the Wild Things Are. I skipped the picture book phase of my learning to read portion of the program, and so I never got to read it when it might have made any sort of lasting impression. With that said, I wasn’t at all interested in the Spike Jonze film interpretation until I read how poorly it’s testing. It seems like he’s either missing the boat and making an adult film, or (my broader suspicion) Warner Bros. forgot that the book isn’t 100% for kids anyway, and there’s no way not to make a book that ends with the monsters yelling “Oh please don’t go–we’ll eat you up–we love you so!” This could end up being absolutely phenominal.

b) A World War Z movie? While I always harbored a desire to film this myself someday, I’m pretty excited by the prospect.

* Via Pat’s Fantasy Hotlist, someone’s gonna be getting fired over this one.

* If I only had about $5m in expendable cash….

* Required reading alert: The Impossible Dream of Energy Independence at Reason.

* An interesting story making the rounds is that Lawrence Lessig, lawyer and copyleft pioneer, is considering a run for Congress. I’m not really a big proponent of copyleft/Free Software Foundation positions, and I think that having a person with those points of view in power could seriously undermine our ability to keep innovative technologies and ideas in the United States. With that said, it would be a very interesting campaign, as Lessig could quite possibly become the first true internet candidate in the sense that he’s well-known around tech circles and the types of philosophies he pushes garner quite a bit of enthusiasm. Then again, he could be the next Ron Paul.

* Gov. Lynch makes his case against re-election in November. God, if I didn’t know of Deval Patrick, I’d say that New Hampshire has one of the dumber governors in the nation.

* What does it say about me that I’m seriously considering this for myself?

* This is an interesting wrinkle: If the Supreme Court somehow rules against individual gun rights this spring, it’ll break a compact with Montana. That’s crazy stuff.

* I agree with this.

* Mark Cuban is awesome.

‘Tis all for now.

Kirk Watson is a Democratic Senator from Texas who has worked with Obama over the last year and is an enthusiastic enough Obama supporter to be on the live feed on Hardball for Obama. Another reasonable question, another answer filled with nothing. And he’s a Senator!

Matthews certainly hasn’t been hard on Obama up to this point, and it’s high time he’s gotten around to this. Of course, Chris Matthews doesn’t actually hate everyone, and doesn’t think you’re an idiot. Neither do I, contrary to the implications in the commentary I’ve had to put up with whenever I bring up this point about Obama and his supporters. But if you think it’s bad now, when Obama’s not officially the nominee, it’s going to get multiple times worse when he is the nominee, and he’s going to have to answer some hard questions, which will force many of his supporters to do the same. The media can only be soft on Obama for so long.

This is reality. Time to get used to it.

Someday, I hope to catch up with everything. Someday.

* Behind the scenes of the superdelegate courting. With Obama winning handily last night, this may be a moot point, but yeah.

* A possibly leaked memo from CNN to the newsfolk about how to handle the Castro resignation news. Good to know they, uh, have their priorities straight.

* QandO provides a link dump of a building backlash against Paul Krugman. Where the hell have they been the last 8 years?

* Newsweek profiles Students for Concealed Carry, an advocacy group forming in response to the campus shootings we’ve had this past year. I still think the “Gun Free Zones” that were in place for most of these shootings are a lawsuit waiting to happen, but kudos to this group for making some attempts at an inroad. The group’s website.

* Overlawyered profiles how the AP chose to handle the Supreme Court’s Katrina insurance case. Kind of ridiculous.

* Reason talks about how Palm Beach is trying to ban “formula restaurants.” Again - the mind boggles.

* Remember the Baltimore cop who went off on the skateboarders? It wasn’t the first time.

Quickies:

* Solid gains in how homosexual/transgender kids are treated by their peers, contrary to what the Matthew Shepard Hate Crime Bill proponents would like to paint. We still have a ways to go, of course, but I liked reading this today.

* So, Senator Obama, when it turns out that one of your predictions turned out to be false, what do you do with the publication: Admit you were incorrect, or send it down the memory hole and hope no one notices? I’m sure not surprised by the answer.

* Interesting news story #1 this week is the Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. It’s causing Europe some minor fits, but I’m in favor of it - secession is often necessary, unfortunately.

* Interesting news story #2 is Fidel Castro stepping down. I don’t expect much change from Fidel to Raul, but even the outside chance that this can cause some reform in terms of normalizing relations and getting Cuba moved somewhere close to the 21st century is good enough for the moment.

* Interesting news story #3: Pakistan’s Musharrif appears to be on his way out. This is probably a more important story than Iraq in terms of the 2008 election, especially seeing as we have a candidate who isn’t all that interested in Pakistani autonomy attempting to run the show.

* Idiotic, unhelpful regulation at work.

* An interesting piece reprinted at Cato regarding global warming data and urban heat.

* The possibility of finding life on other planets in my lifetime may have gotten a step closer this week, as a study released suggests that there are a number of stars of similar stature to our own Sun, and that there could be a very large amount of Earth-like planets rotating them, or being formed. Cool stuff.

* Howard Kurtz contrasts the media treatment given to Hillary Clinton as opposed to Obama.

* One thing I’m not impressed by is the “Obama plagiarized Deval Patrick” smear attempt. When you base your campaign on ideas and platitudes, you’re going to sound like other people who do the same thing. I’m also not impressed at all by the “I did coke and had gay sex with Obama in 1999” smear that’s floating around the blogosphere right now - it’s completely ridiculous and ultimately a sickening prospect. What I am impressed by is that Obama only considers hanging a Che Guevara flag “inappropriate” while not demanding that his volunteers take it down. While I’m glad he’s said it’s inappropriate, you’d think he’d take the moment to focus on why it’s inappropriate as opposed to simply glossing over it and saying that it’s “offensive to Cuban-Americans.” I mean, he says that Guevara and he don’t share ideas, but his economic policy seems to be trying to send us in the same direction. It’ll be interesting to see if this story ever truly dies off.

Good times. I have a ton of stuff piled up - I wish I could say I was busy this weekend, but I won’t lie - I spent most of it playing Blue Dragon. If you’re reading on the LJ side, I’m getting intermittent comment notifications, so if I haven’t replied to your comments from earlier, it’s because I only saw them about 20 minutes ago.

* The closest thing to zombies of late. Personally, I’d consider myself blessed in a few ways.

* The rumored number two porn collection in the world doesn’t actually exist. One less reason to visit Cambridge University, I suppose.

* Reason covers the Hugo Chavez disaster. To me, the Chavez situation continues to be one of the great disasters of the world currently - not nearly as bad as the situations in Africa and the Middle East, but a horrible situation that should really get more honest coverage.

* Attention, Democratic voters who subscribe to the “the world hates us because Bush’s diplomacy sucks” meme: claiming that a world leader lacks a soul isn’t going to repair that. And I don’t especially care if she’s right (because I’m inclined to believe she is) - that’s not how you deal with it.

* A fun link for video game fans, especially those with any fond memories of the Ultima series: The Many Deaths of Lord British.

* Larry Kudlow reminds us that if a recession really is coming, it ain’t there yet. Expect the media to continue to push the issue regardless, however - they haven’t been honest about the economy in years, so why start now?

* A great story about the guy who moved into a homeless shelter with $25, and came out a year later with an apartment and $5000 in cash.

* Cato demonstrates the reality surrounding part of Hillary Clinton’s health care plan. Oops!

* England floats a smoking permit. The mind reels.

* I hate the Dolphins because I’m a Patriots fan, but I’ve always liked Zach Thomas. He’s set to meet with the Pats this week, and the thought of it excites me to see him in a New England uniform.

* Sometime last year, you’ll remember a video circulating from 1994 about Dick Cheney’s position about war in Iraq. Namely, that he was against it for reasons many believe actually occurred during the last few years. Of course, it’ll be interesting to see people spin the video of Bill “I was always against the Administration’s war” Clinton making the case Bush should have made. Video here. If we did it right the first time, or if Clinton actually acted as he should have in 1998, it’d be very interesting to see where we’d be today, 10 years later.

* A great spring training prank by the Phillies.

Dunno if I’ll get another post out today, but who knows.

Things apparently got away from me this week.

* I’m a week late on this, but an interesting piece in The Washington Post about how exorcisms are making a comeback.Not shocking, this sort of thing regained prominence under John Paul II. Someday, I’ll have to go into detail as to why I’m not a big JPII fan.

* A “so sad, it’s funny” story: Chairman Mao offered Henry Kissinger 10 million Chinese women in 1973. Perhaps more shocking is that Kissinger didn’t take the offer privately…

* When I first saw this video, it had around 400 views. We’re now past the 300k mark (I told you things got away from me), and it’s a great video. Next time you wonder why I generally don’t trust the police, show them this lunacy:

The kicker is at the end, where he becomes concerned of it getting on the internet. The good news is that he’s been suspended pending investigation, but I expect him to be fully exonerated, because that’s what happens.

* Move that Doomsday Clock minute hand: we may have our first LOLcat marriage proposal.

* A funny e-mail to Jonah Goldberg: Is Barack Obama Angel’s Jasmine? If you don’t get the reference, rent the last few seasons of Angel and get back to me. If you’ve forgotten, Jasmine was the goddess played by Gina Torres, who essentially mesmerized everyone with her demoness wiles. For the record, very uncanny.

* Check out this post at Reason regarding SpeechNow and their attempts to organize as a 527, and then tell me with a straight face that our campaign rules make sense. I dare you.

‘Tis all for now.

No matter what, any song you make about a campaign or a politician you like WILL SUCK. This is not a question of subjectivity. You will try to prove me wrong and you will fail. STOP.

This is much nicer:

Links for the most wonderful day of the year, where optimism reigns supreme, the sun invariably shines, and life becomes a little more worth living…

* …that’s right: Today’s the official start of Spring Training for a good chunk of teams. Booyeah. Be ready to weep, National League.

* If you’re interested in that other holiday, Carrie Brownstein of Sleator-Kinney and NPR blogger, gives some tips on how to make a good Valentine’s Day mix.

* QandO sets the record straight about negotiations regarding future presence in Iraq. The long-and-short: this is a GOOD thing.

Because you should never blog about video games when you’re trying to finish the rest of your stuff to go and play one.

1) I’m very, very excited about Spore. Due 7 September, it’s the new Will Wright (SimCity, etc) project where you essentially start a civilization from scratch, eventually having it evolve to the point where you can explore other people’s worlds. I really hope it can live up to the hype.

2) EA retains the exclusive contract with the NFL until 2013. Sigh.

3) Electronic Gaming Monthly had a great piece (not online yet) about achievements and gamerscore on the XBox 360. One person profiled was a father who played 60 hours a week, obsessed with raising his gamerscore.

I personally love the achievement process on the 360 - it really increases replayability for me and it’s fun to try and do bizarre things to get achievements (my favorite so far is the one in Crackdown that requires you to keep a bad guy up in the air using a set number of rockets). But I also know that my 2500 gamerscore or whatever isn’t ever going to reach an upper echelon of scores, either. But wow, sometimes the gamerscore thing can get crazy.

Since there’s not much more to say at this point about Obama’s ridiculous campaign, perhaps it’s time to start shining a light on some of the ideas he’s trotting out there, either as a Senator or as a possible action as President. Here’s one to get the ball rolling:

Meet the Patriot Corporation Act. This act, co-sponsored by Obama, is an interesting beast. The quick and dirty is this: Corporations will get tax breaks under this plan, as long as they meet a few requirements: namely that they do 90% of their production and employment in the United States while offering decent wages, health insurance, and other perks. Of course, these numbers aren’t defined by anything realistic - the wages are required to be “enough to keep a family of three out of poverty,” push for “neutrality” in worker organization drives (a clear shot across the bow at the reisstance to the elimination of the secret ballot in terms of organizing) and the employer needs to cover “at least 60% of each worker’s health care premiums.” Never mind that wages to “keep a family of three out of poverty” mean completely different things depending on where you are and what industry you’re in (not to mention that it sets some arbitrary standard as to what salary level constitutes being patriotic, but whatever) - the bill uses the census figures which fail to account for the broad standard of living deviances across the nation - but if any company attempted to actually reach this standard that didn’t already, the tax break that the company gets? The equivalent of 1% of the taxable income. That doesn’t come close to covering this nonsense.

This bill is really a great example of how Barack Obama simply doesn’t understand the problems that are facing this nation economically right now. Right now, the United States has some of the most uncompetitive corporate tax rates in the world. At 35% on the federal level alone (the rate can go north of 10 points higher when you factor in state and local taxes), that puts us 18th overall and nearly 8 points above the average, an average that is declining as Europe moves to a flat tax and places like Canada plan to drop their rate dramatically. General Motors continues to shed jobs because it costs so much to employ people in the United States compared to overseas markets. In the long term, the blunt reality is that the United States is moving away from a manufacturing economy and toward a service one, and part of that move is the recognition that globalization is here to stay.

Barack Obama mentions corporate taxation once on his website. His only plan to deal with the fact that we’re falling behind internationally is to try and close loopholes and try to govern where international corporations decide to set up shop. Instead of aggressively dealing with the problem in a way that keeps us productive and competitive - a sharp reduction in corporate tax rates, for a possible example - he goes for the Same Old Democratic Response: act as if the corporations and businesses in America are not doing enough for this nation, and saddle them with the extra costs, fees, and taxes that are causing them to close up shop and head elsewhere to begin with. Politics as usual. All Obama’s positions advocate are the further siphoning of jobs to lower-cost nations, and harm the economy in poor ways.

1) Essentially, since Thanksgiving, I’ve been mired in a Team Fortress 2 addiction like none other. Not counting the time I’ve spent playing Portal or Half Life 2, I’ve probably spent between 80-85 hours playing TF2. The last time I hit a wall quite like this, it was Quake II and I was still in high school. I really do love the game, but my addiction is finally breaking…

2) …just to be replaced with Blue Dragon. I got into it a bit, then picked up TF2, and never looked back. Diving back in makes me realize how much I’d been itching for a good traditional RPG. The one annoyance is save points - I used to be in the camp that save points were nice quirks for games, but when it’s 11:45 at night and you just wanna go to bed, finding a save point in the middle of a flying fortress is terrible. Beyond that, though, the only other fault with Blue Dragon is that I’m not finding it to be incredibly challenging. I may be a wee bit overpowering due to some leveling I did lost in one cavern, but, I mean, whatever happened to Atma Weapon-type bosses that could still kick ass and take names if you weren’t strategic with your choices regardless of your strength?

3) I tried Heavenly Sword at Target a few weeks ago. Frankly, the one thing that might have convinced me to get a PS3 was hugely disappointing (mmm, hack and slash), and I’m glad I don’t have to think about it anymore.

4) Lost Odyssey comes out today. Right now, I’m telling myself to finish Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata, minimum, before diving into a new RPG. Because at some point, I’ll need to play Enchanted Arms and Dead Rising, too.

5) Of course, all of this means poor Super Mario Galaxy is being tossed aside for my gaming time. Which is sad - I like the game a lot! There’s something super-annoying about the fact that the game e-mails me, though. Grr.

That’s all for now, I think. I could go on, but my head hurts.

* From Jana, a link to the latest David Brooks editorial about the campaign. It details a probable result of a Democratic Presidency in political terms, which I can’t say I disagree with. It’s just like the relative failure of the Democratic Congress, but on the executive level.

* Instead of angering people daily with the more uncomfortable aspects of the Obama campaign, just keep an eye on this blog: Is Barack Obama the Messiah? It’s a blog that collects links and news stories about the more-than-occasional deification of this author’s favorite punching bag. Joel Stein has more to say on the matter.

* On the flip side, a cool list at The Friendly Atheist showing the relative lack of differences between Christians and atheists.

* Hugo Chavez has decided that, since the United States courts have decided that ExxonMobil is entitled to some money for what his government stole from them, he’s going to threaten to hold out on oil if we freeze those assets. Bright idea, buddy - hardly anyone can refine your oil, and it’ll hurt you much, much more than it’ll hurt us. After all, we can always buy oil from the dozens of other suppliers who have better crude anyway. In the meantime, Chavez has decided to put the oil revenues in Swiss banks. Classy.

* National Review’s David Freddoso gives some context to the turnout meme. Interesting data.

* So, John McCain supports draconian controls on finances for elections, but doesn’t see the need for those limits for himself. He’s well within rights to turn down private financing, but this is an excellent example of the two-facedness of McCain on many issues.

So I’m conflicted about John McCain at this point. I admit it. Ultimately, I’m interested in conservative politicians, and McCain decidedly isn’t one - he’s been wrong on taxes, inconsistent on the judiciary, is in the big-government “conservatism” mold of George W. Bush, has a questionable Constitutional record (to be generous), and is highly interested in further regulatory madness.

On the other hand, he might not actually govern this way. He’s a relatively stand-up guy - “Straight-Talk Express” is a load of hooey, but I do respect his ability to tell it how it is when it matters (as hideous as the 100 year in Iraq comment may sound to some people, it is the most honest and realistic thing I’ve heard about Iraq in this campaign so far), especially on the war, even if it’s not a major issue for me this go ’round. This RedState.com piece on McCain is very compelling in a number of ways for me, especially given that it was written when Romney still had a fighting chance. There’s plenty to like about McCain even if you don’t like McCain.

There’s a lot I have to attempt to at least forgive McCain for - McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act being the worst offender. It goes beyond that, though: things as simple as ANWR drilling are opposed, yet he’s been criticized in a few circles of not necessarily coming to thoughtful conclusions on other positions. Hell, (same link) he’s even said that he’s not all that well-educated on economics. That’s probably the biggest issue facing this country over the next four years. Apparently taking on Don Luskin will help him here, but seriously.

But the most nagging problem I have is that I honestly feel that, both strategically and politically, McCain is a better choice for the party he’s running against than the party he’s going to be nominated for. Strategically because I have a completely unsupported opinion that the winner of this campaign on either side will likely have a Carter-like effect on their party’s landscape. Politically because McCain’s political positions, especially recently, speak more to a Democratic point of view than a Republican one: regulation of speech and financial contributions, derision of strict constructionist judicial nominees, hysterical knee-jerk political reaction to current events (and that’s only issues I care about - ask a Republican about immigration and border control sometime). Even today, a regulatory boxing agency championed by McCain passed the Senate. Hell, McCain may have toyed with switching parties, and it doesn’t even sound ridiculous. That the media has been completely behind McCain to this point only helps. After all, how else does he get more anti-war votes than any other Republican candidate? If the media can get behind him as much as they have, he can’t be that bad, right?

Or look at it another way, especially since most people reading this at this point are liberal/Democrat/both: Take the war and abortion out of the equation (two issues that really won’t be significantly affected by who wins in November, no matter how much you might want it to), and would you really be uncomfortable? Really?

Here’s the thing: for conservatives to accept McCain, we need to cross our fingers that he a) can be “educated” economically and b) actually nominates palatable judges who aren’t going to pull a Souter. That’s the bare minimum. I’m not sure I can do that with confidence. Compare that to the Democratic nominees - as the Senate is unlikely to get a supermajority, at least the GOP can filibuster poor judicial nominees in the meantime, and can play hardball with the budget. If the GOP has taught us anything under Bush, capitulating for the sake of party unity is always on the table, and for the Congressional Republicans to bend here and there for a President McCain on issues that Republicans are traditionally against is a definite fear. And in the unlikely event that the Republicans take the Senate back? Yikes.

So convince me. I’m relatively comfortable with sitting it out or helping ballot access up here on the local level, but if I can at least slow our march toward disaster, I can be convinced.

* Depending on who you talk to, the Boston Public Library DRM protest was either a complete flop or an interesting diversion. I’m still of the position that the old way of protesting (marching, waving signs, etc) is dead in a nation with a 24 hour news cycle and an up-to-the-moment blogosphere, but this was destined to fail to begin with. After all, do most people who use a library know what DRM is anyway? And if they do know, do they really care? Probably not.

* Go figure, the New York Times of all publications prints an interesting look at the American Middle Class.

* If there’s any evidence that regulatory measures have gone completely haywire, here’s a story about a topic dear to my heart: the right of Los Angeles vendors to sell hot dogs wrapped in bacon.

* At Cinematical, a cool collection of photographs celebrating Alfred Hitchcock films. I love stuff like this. Also, a while back, they posted Disney animated recreations which are pretty cool.

A quick follow-up to the post from yesterday, it’s worth highlighting:

Scot Colford is the Applications Manager at the Boston Public Library. His position is essentially similar to mine - DRM is annoying, but it gets more materials to more people. He left a comment to direct people to The Boston Public Library’s digital blog, and it’s worth reading for the other side of the coin.