Again, from today's 'The Age': "(Cheney) knows that with John McCain you get a twofer: George Bush's economic policies and Dick Cheney's foreign policies," Obama said in Columbus, before heading to Cleveland for a joint ... with rocker Bruce Springsteen.
From today's 'The Age', regarding the 16 year-old boy who died after being king-hit at a party:
Sergeant Guy said the assault was an example of the huge ramifications a punch can have.
"It's very disappointing. In my role I've been involved in a few assaults that have had poor outcomes, but I'm at a loss to explain why teenage boys of this calibre would want to get involved in things like this," he said.
Is this sworn protector suggesting that his mighty fists have inadvertently sent 'a few' lesser men to a premature grave...? And that this is OK for him, but not for teenagers -- especially not ones of insufficient 'calibre'...?
I guess as a police-person, his calibre must be really big.
"Oh, I think they're just not used to someone coming in from the outside saying, You know what? It's time that normal 'Joe six-pack' Americans are finally represented in the position of vice presidency"
Well, why not? Having a 'Joe six-pack' as President has worked rather swimmingly for the past eight years:
"Forensic experts in Dortmund were defrosting the babies yesterday."
There's something you don't read every day. In airport-grade horror fiction perhaps, or maybe in Hillary's latest anti-Obama commercial, but rarely in serious journalism.
It seems that infanticide is becoming a major concern in Germany. In this latest incident, a young man rummaging around for a snack in his parents' freezer "stumbled across a bag which was open and through the opening he could see the head and the arm of a baby." This relieves my concerns regarding the unruly state of my own freezer - the scariest things in there are a quantity of bread-crusts voluminous enough to keep a group of park bench-sitting, bird-feeding old geezers* in business for many an idyllic weekday afternoon, and a chicken curry - circa 1992.
While this story relates to one gruesome incident, the problem of infanticide in Germany was first brought to my attention a few weeks ago, under the headline 'Germany Divided Over Baby Killings'. Since my usual process of assimilating new information is to read as little as possible and let my imagination fill in the blanks, I initially assumed that the story was that some babies were killed and a large proportion - enough for there to be deemed a 'division' in the populace - of Germans thought that this was a-OK.
(Is it a tragic reflection of some archaic German stereotype that I considered this a plausible explanation for the headline, or am I just a bit of a dick?)
But alas, my favorite headline of the year-to-date was soon altered to 'Germany Divided Over Baby Killings in the East.' The real, and somewhat more mundane, story is that there's more infanticide occurring in East Germany than in the West. Boo! More stories about the inherent evil of those goose-stepping krauts, please.
The moral of this latest story, I feel, is clear: If you're going to kill your babies, dispose of their bodies - don't preserve them in the freezer. OR, if you simply must freeze them, then hide their little corpses in a box of McCain's Frozen Steak Diane Dinner - no one with a conscience is going to touch that shit.
*Crisotunity Contest - What collective noun best describes park bench-sitting, bird-feeding old geezers..?
After November 4th 2008, exactly 8 months from today, George W Bush will no longer be President of the USA (God bless the 22nd amendment). Who will take his place as leader of the free world and have the unenviable job of cleaning up the giant steaming turd W. has left on the rug in the oval office? One of the people featured in Crisotunity’s Candidate Catalogue, that’s who. Now let’s take a look at the field:
***DEMOCRATS*** Hillary Clinton
3 SECOND GUIDE:
As First Lady, Hillary’s proposed Health Care Bill was famously defeated in 1994. She spent the rest of her First Ladyship more concerned with Bill’s heath care, which included an incongruous number of penicillin shots – the reason for which became apparent in 1998.
RACE SO FAR:
Two things have marked Hillary’s campaign-
1)The fact that the one-time front runner has been dacked by Obama in the last few months - once considered a near-certainty to grab the nomination she may be out of the race as early as tomorrow if she loses big in Ohio and Texas.
2)The tears she shed in early January. Interestingly enough the media’s response to the incident shied away from sexist remarks about pressure and a woman being President and such, like… what if she cries ALL the time? ..when negotiating trade agreements, or when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says nasty things behind her back, or when she can’t find shoes to match her tastefully androgynous pantsuit…? No, none of that. In fact most media commentators went in the other direction and questioned the sincerity of the tears, putting it down to a stunt and not believing that such a cold-hard bitch could have - let alone express - any such emotion. I was in this latter camp, as I’d read reports that she’d had her tear ducts surgically removed in 2001.
WOULD BE A GOOD DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
…she’d make a formidable candidate in the general election, despite her vagina. Hillary claims more experience than Obama when it comes to matters of foreign policy, which could make the impending tussle with McCain a tad less worrisome. However…
WOULD BE A BAD DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
…she’s given the ‘more experienced than Obama’ angle a solid go for the last few months. It’s her go-to attack, culminating in this fairly hideous advertisement:
This angle hasn’t helped her so far; in fact it seems most voters don’t care if she’s got years of experience, or if her sole practice in foreign affairs is shooing all the Thai hookers out of Bill’s rumpus room.
IF ELECTED PRESIDENT…:
…well she IS a woman, so you can expect her to confound other world leaders with that weird indirect talk that chicks seem to love:
Chick: ‘I’m reading a really great book at the moment.’ Translation: ‘I don’t want to go to the movie. I’d like to stay home and read a book.’
Chick: ‘You know, I think the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is just nifty.’ Translation: ‘Knock it off with the nuke shit or we’ll shoot you all.’
(On a totally unrelated note – can anyone surmise why I’m still single…?)
Barack Obama 3 SECOND GUIDE:
Isn’t he just dreamy? Listen to the guy talk and you can see why he draws comparisons to JFK and Martin Luther King Jr. Unfortunately these comparisons have also brought fears that his assassination is inevitable. On the upside, if he does get shot the resulting sympathy vote will almost surely deliver the White House to the Democrats. Nice.
RACE SO FAR:
Along with performing far better than most people expected, speculation about Obama’s religion has also been a key feature of his campaign. He has repeatedly had to deny claims that he is a suicide bomber - oh sorry, a Muslim – most recently when the Clinton camp circulated this photo of Obama on a diplomatic trip to Africa:
George Bush had a similar problem a few years ago when this photo did the rounds:
It was thought that his approval rating would take a big hit until it was revealed that Bush is NOT actually a Mexican - he’s just an arsehole.
WOULD BE A GOOD DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
…he has some advantages over Hillary: Firstly he's less likely to have votes siphoned away by Ralph Nader, who is again running as an independent - perhaps Nader's greatest political impact in 4 presidential runs was giving Al Gore's chances a nipple-cripple in 2000 - and secondly, Obama never voted to go to war in Iraq; though this point is possibly superseded by the fact that he didn’t vote against the war either – he wasn’t even a senator when the vote took place. However, his possible inexperience aside, Obama would bring a bit of Rock Star to the general election. The kids love him, lefties love him, and Beatles concert-like swooning has been reported at some gatherings. He could go far, as long as his supporters can control themselves on polling day; tearing ones clothes off and screaming the candidates name is apparently an invalid voting technique - though it makes more sense than the electoral college system.
WOULD BE A BAD DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
…he may get seriously challenged by McCain on the national security issue. With two polarised viewpoints on the war and foreign policy in general, many average Americans may go with the ‘safer’ option of McCain. Also, his name sounds like Osama. And isn’t that BROWN skin, not ‘black’? Desert-browned skin perhaps…? And LOOK! He’s wearing a turban!!!!
IF ELECTED PRESIDENT…:
…well he IS a black guy, so you can expect him to pimp out all of America’s finest bitches to visiting dignitaries; pop many-a-cap in the asses of all those frontin’ mutha fuckers in the desert; and he’ll probably rob a liquor store on the way home from congress or something.
***REPUBLICANS***
John McCain
3 SECOND GUIDE:
John McCain was a prisoner of war in Vietnam for five and a half years. In this time he was beaten nearly to death and repeatedly tortured, yet never gave up vital information (citing the names of players from his favourite football team instead of giving up the names of his men). He even refused early release, as there were men in captivity that had been there longer than him. There goes some grit, right there.
It’s also rumoured that he once ate a raw steak carved from an enemy’s thigh – though the source on that one is a tad fuzzy.
RACE SO FAR:
John McCain has delivered knockout blows to Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson (and other hangers-on), with only Mike Huckabee and a quite-likely insane Ron Paul delaying his inevitable nomination. Romney was once considered the front-runner for the nomination, but made many conservative voters wary with his Mormon beliefs – where was he going to house all his extra First Ladies? Giuliani was relying almost solely on how he handled 9/11 as mayor of New York, and was expected to be a strong candidate, but his strategy involved a tiny flaw – concentrating on Florida and not campaigning in the early rounds. By the time the old people and alligators got a say, Rudy was already out of the running. As for Fred Thompson, or as he is better (and more popularly) known, District Attorney Arthur Branch, before he quit the race opinion polls showed the only variable having a positive effect on his campaign was the quality of that weeks’ repeat of Law and Order. Unfortunately this weekly bump was severely counteracted when Thompson, in a move against which he should have been warned, spoke in public on the campaign trail.
WOULD BE A GOOD REPUBLICAN NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
… he’s got big, hard nuts. Republicans need to be stern and dour faced, as their primary campaign strategy is to subtly promote Fear and Intolerance. McCain should learn to never smile – when he does it seems quite forced, rather like that deleted scene from Terminator 2 when the brat tries to make Arnie seem more human:
I assume McCain was taught this exact lesson by his campaign manager or a minder or some such:
He should forget it immediately - it could prove a costly mistake.
WOULD BE A BAD REPUBLICAN NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
…he’s less aligned with Satan than many Republicans. While current VP Dick Cheney is surely the Devil’s own progeny, McCain’s position amongst the forces of evil is a little more muddied. McCain previously held sensible views on many issues: he opposed large tax cuts for the rich, proposed a pathway to citizenship for many of the country’s 12 million illegal immigrants, supported legal abortion rather than have women undertake “illegal and dangerous operations”, and was once battling to end the US Military’s use of torture. However, he has changed his view on all these issues in the last few years – and has always been a staunch supporter of the Iraq war and the troop surge. There’s no doubt he was spewed forth from the underworld, but it’s possible he was originally a simple denizen of one of Hell’s minor levels. Judging by his demeanour, it was level 5, where the ‘angry and sullen’ dwell.
IF ELECTED PRESIDENT…:
John McCain will be 72 years old at the time of his inauguration. However, he won’t be the first president to wear nappies. That honour goes to Jimmy Carter, though his use was recreational, and not due to age-related incontinence.
MIKE HUCKABEE
3 SECOND GUIDE:
Huckabee, a Baptist minister, appeals to those voters that like their politickin' with a side order of God. Yeee-hah! Some say he has an all-American charm; I say that his ‘wholesomeness’ is disquietingly similar to that exuded by Dylan Thomas’ character in the film ‘Happiness’:
RACE SO FAR:
Huckabee has been campaigning with Chuck Norris in an effort to lure young voters. This may backfire amongst Vietnamese-American voters, who now have a legitimate reason to fear for their lives:
Huckabee has proven popular in the crucifix carrying states, winning more contests than was expected. This may be put down to the intervention of God, who Huckabee plans to enlist to personally re-draft the US constitution:
“…it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.” - Mike Huckabee 14/1/08
WOULD BE A GOOD REPUBLICAN NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
Ain’t going to happen: McCain has it wrapped up. I personally think Huck is only staying in the race to prove his popularity in the Bible Belt, which is yet to express its full confidence in McCain, and hence set himself up as a potential Vice Presidential candidate. And as a bonus, if named McCain’s running mate, the cheery, happy-go-lucky Huck and the gruff former POW would transform watching the campaign into a nostalgic throwback to my cartoon loving youth:
WOULD BE A BAD REPUBLICAN NOMINEE BECAUSE…:
Huck lost 50-odd kilograms in 2003 after being given 10 years to live if he remained a fatty. This may not sit well with the party’s base in Middle America, who refuse to lose weight if it means giving up 'value for money' at the dinner table:
IF ELECTED PRESIDENT…:
…then we should, just as I'm sure Huckabee would, all bow down to the glory of the Lord, ‘cos it’d be a freakin’ miracle.
Imagine for a moment that your name is, oh, let’s say, Jesus Christ. And imagine also that you were indeed born around 2008 years ago. Let us also compensate somewhat for historical inaccuracies and debate regarding your true birth date by slapping on another 20 years. Let us also imagine that, instead of gifts of frankincense and myrrh, the Magi from the East were of a high enough Level, and sufficiently skilled in Enchantment or Necromancy to cast Immortality upon you at birth. The gift of gold is still given in our invented scenario, though this time you receive not a once-off lump-sum, but gold futures and options that will net you, on average, $1,000,000 per day for the rest of your immortal life. So throughout the centuries as you watch as your name, and that of your pappy, is evoked as justification for persecution, war, and genocide again and again. You reach the 21st century, and while the filthy, arrogant hubris and hypocrisy of those in your various churches leads to the continuation of hideous crimes against children, you continue to collect your one million smackers each and every day. And behold! It is 2008. And lo, it was written: You’re one rich son of a god.
But just how rich are you?
2008 years, plus the 20 year margin of error, times 365 days a year (leap years be-damned), times $1,000,000 = …
$740,220,000,000 or,
740.22 billion dollars
So… you ask: What is the point of this blasphemous hypothetical?
Well, economist Joseph Stiglitz recently calculated that the cost of the Iraq war stands currently at $3 trillion dollars for the U.S. alone – and SIX trillion if you add the cost to Britain and the rest of the skirmish’s participants. And a trillion dollars (let alone six) is such a massive amount of money to imagine that some perspective may be required.
So, if you happened to be born in the year dot, and happened to be bestowed with a million bucks a day, every day, come today you would not be able to pay off one EIGHTH of the bill for the war in Iraq. You’d need to have been born sometime around 16,000 BC to be able to pay the cheque and leave the War Room without washing dishes for eternity.
Oh, and if the bill isn’t paid by 2017, the interest on the money the US has borrowed SO FAR to fund the war will ITSELF equal a cool trillion…
The anger from here could spread to many on obvious place: to the effect of the US economy on the rest of the world, and subsequently how such massive spending is grossly irresponsible; to the sheer waste when you consider the millions of people that such money could help find dignity and self-sufficiency (the homeless, the mentally ill, the survivors of genocide such as the one occurring in Dafur, and, oh, maybe the 4.2 million Iraqi civilians so far displaced by the US’s war…); to the inclusion in this calculation of care for soldiers physically injured during the conflict, but the exclusion of the cost to individuals, families, and society wrought by the trench-like mental and emotional scars that will be borne by too many returning soldiers; and to other such universal outrages, like the fact that at least a few thou' of the six trillion could be thrown Ol’ Mr Crisotunity’s way... Just enough to keep the wolves from the door... I’ve almost been reduced to frying up the mice and lizards my cats have been catching, for god’s sake.
But no, we shan't go there. I’ll simply direct you to this article, which should make clear the dizzying amount of dollars being flushed down the blood-soaked toilet.
First, an apology: As I understand it, a primary condition behind commenting on current affairs is that the affairs are current, and the affairs that inspired this particular commentary are now many weeks old – ancient history in the bizarre little universe of news reporting. However, as you may have already discerned, I am devastatingly lazy. So, for the chronological disparity of these columns, I apologise. For my laziness, despite the causal relationship it holds with said disparity, I staunchly reserve my apologies. ‘Why?’ I hear you think. Because the laziness that prevents me from writing as often as I could, that keeps my novel far from complete, is a part of who I am. And I would appreciate that if anything unfortunate were to happen to me that, during any speeches made by my loved ones, this aspect of my personality was not suppressed like it was a feasible design for an electric car, but celebrated - as will, no doubt, my sunny disposition and love of fluffy kitties; I would appreciate a Speaker for the Dead.
A Speaker for the Dead, as featured in the excellent science fiction novel of the same name, is a person who undertakes extensive research regarding the life of a deceased person and presents their findings at the person’s funeral – big hairy warts and all. The speakee’s life is presented as objectively as possible. And while I believe objectivity itself is a myth more fanciful than Scientology’s core beliefs, the Speaker collates and presents so many subjective accounts of a person’s life that an approximation of objectivity is created. After all, a person is not only how those closest perceive them, or even how they perceive themselves – the most accurate picture of a person comes about through a balanced, well-rounded summation of their actions. So in my case, a Speaker would, with appropriate evidence, show that I’m a fairly kind, generous guy. But, it would also be shown that I often find social interaction a painful chore, which may be perceived by some as coldness or even superiority. The speaker would also be inclined to illustrate that I can be rather gullible and short-sighted – perhaps evidenced by the time when, in primary school, I was tricked into peeing on my own head: "We’re having a contest to see how high you can pee. I hit the roof: can you? Remember, you have to aim straight up..." You see? Balance.
It was this balance that was sorely missing from the media coverage of Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin’s unfortunate death. I’m not suggesting the guy’s skeleton’s should have been hauled out for public display – the Speaker should only state his findings to those intimate with the deceased. And, as evidenced by the public’s reaction to Germane Greer’s anti-Irwin outburst, it would have been a poor business move by any media outlet to present anything but a highly positive image of Irwin. No, what really raised my ire was the local current affairs programs disgusting, money-prompted hypocrisy. For weeks they near deified Irwin, with the most shameful display coming from Today Tonight’s Naomi Robson - presenting from outside Australia Zoo, dressed in a khaki shirt with a lizard on her shoulder. These are the same programs that tortured Irwin when he dangled his baby in front of a crocodile in 2004. Terror suspects, even those with electrodes attached to their berries, have seen classier treatment than that which was dished out to the Croc Hunter at the time. And now? These same programs have slapped a halo on his head and sent his wings and harp along Express Post. One of the commercial news programs even likened Irwin's death to those of Princess Diana and John Lennon. Between this TV coverage and the Herald-Sun’s minimum 10 pages a day, every day, devoted to the event for almost two weeks, I couldn’t help but picture a group of media executives performing unnatural acts with Irwin’s still warm corpse to the rhythmic sounds of a cash register. Ching. Ching. Ching.
Now, I’m not completely naïve. I understand that such coverage was great for business, that millions watched Irwin’s memorial and the first interview with his grieving wife. I understand that money makes the world go ‘round, and that things aren’t going to change anytime soon. And believe me, I understand that apathy is a solution – it can placate the inconvenient personal upheaval that comes with objection to such base profiteering. But I choose to own my hate, my disgust. Extreme emotions present themselves for a reason; hold them, use them to propel yourself in new directions. Only through personal change will greater change manifest. And while profit is sanctified, peace will remain elusive.
So, you may be thinking: ‘Mr Crisotunity, you truly are a wondrous voice of truth!’ Or, you may be thinking: ‘Mr Crisotunity, you truly are a pompous, preaching, patronising pinko!’ Or, (possibly) your thoughts lie somewhere in between. All these thoughts regarding who I am are valid. They are all me. And I trust that after my death, presumably very many years from now, someone will present them all – and hopefully I’ll have achieved something that will relegate ‘pee-on-head’ stories to the opening act, and not the encore.
