Advertising

Now that sounds like a good time.
You know what else is a good time? ImprovEverywhere.


Matt...did you pull this the last time you and the missus were across the pond?


Sounds a bit dodgy if you ask me. For an alternative, try Jake's Mexican Food Diet.

Ten days in Tlanchinol, Mexico! All the tacos and alambres suizos you can eat!
Just include one glass of local water with each meal.
Tested and approved?

Mazda π

Is this a new special edition Mazda that's coming out?

Hat tip: Tyson.

McCain 1, Obama 0

For a little background....

And here's a well-stated, well-reasoned crack at what Obama, et al., are really getting at. Good for Andy McCarthy.

On a semi-related note, I'm thinking that this immigration bill nonsense might be the beginning of the end (perhaps the end of the beginning?) for McCain in this election cycle. Time will tell.

On an unrelated note, what am I saying? Time doesn't tell us anything--we find out for ourselves, after a certain amount of time has passed. It's like that phrase "time heals all wounds." The hell it does. Time is just how we measure the healing process--time didn't mend my broken leg, it pretty much did that itself. Time is just how I know how long it took. How did I get started on this?

Do it. I dare you.

Come on, it's even mulitple choice. And do it without google, people. Really.



Disclaimer #1: I'm not sure how poorly you have to do in order to fall into the "Don't Vote" category, nor if it is specific to the questions (i.e. if you ID all the politicians correctly but miss all the actors, will they still say don't vote?).

Disclaimer #2: I think it would be great (and easy) to figure out how many of the shoulds vs. should-nots are registered to vote, how many actually vote, and who they vote for in national elections. Just tack a couple questions onto the quiz, are you registered; R, I, or D; who do you vote for, etc. This might be telling.

If you're bold enough, post a comment and let me know if you'll be at the polls or not.

BTW: A+ b*****s.

Ouch.

First the "documentary." Then the response. Then the letter. Then the video.

Run, Fred. Run.

Incriminating sidenote: I picked one up in Mexico City last summer. They're good. Props to the Fred for his choice in cigars.

Leadership

Now here's a concept that seems to be lacking in political circles, especially places that rhyme with Squashington DC. Senator Joe Lieberman (probably more conservative that Nebraska's Republican senator-wink) had this to say on the floor of the Senate today:

But, leadership requires sometimes that we defy public opinion if that is what is necessary to do what is right for our country. In fact, at a time like this, we are required to do what each of us believes is right, and that might not be what is popular.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but he is, in my opinion, hitting the nail on the head. The sheep follow the shepherd's lead, not the other way 'round, lest they all wind up wandering off into something stupid or dangerous. Please don't think I'm trying to disparage the typical American voter/poll participant, although I will say that there's quite a bit to be said in that regard (education-cough) and I did find a fun website recently--please, take the test.

Point 1: It seems to be a mark of a leader that one does what is right or what one believes is right even if that means getting people on your bad side (read: losing a re-election campaign). In other words, being a leader means that people have chosen to follow you for a time, but here's the catch, twenty-two style: as soon as you begin to define yourself by that leadership, looking beyond what you believe is right to what you believe your constituency wants, you've relegated yourself to following votes, and nobody's following except you.

Point 2: While I appreciate the representative part of our republic-esque government, I think the popular part presents us with a bit of a quandary.

(Tangent: in a society best summarized by a Queen song, two minutes is too long to wait for a Hot Pocket, the guy driving 2 mph over the speed limit in the left lane is going too slow, and the average person's patience is gone before the end of this tangent or before the waitress can show up, whichever comes first, having "leaders" elected for two, four or six years doesn't jive well. If God-forbid, your opinion changes between polling day and oath of office, you're still stuck with the same elected officials until their time is up, however many unbearable years down the road that may be. Note the sarcasm.)

Popularity these days fluctuates more than Oprah's weight--*rimshot*--and the person who is popular one day might not be as popular the next day. Our impatience has gotten the best of us and we can't bear to put up with the way things are any longer, because we just don't like it, and we shouldn't have to deal with anything we don't like. (Yes, I'm still on that sarcasm thing.)

Random question--is this the byproduct of a state of education that cares more about students' feelings of self-esteem than their ability to use the chain rule to integrate sqrt(1-cos x)? dx?

Anyway, long story elongated, Lieberman's helping me to see a vital flaw in the idea of thinking of our elected officials as leaders. If we try to follow someone who is merely following us, we end up in this cycle that, to anyone on the outside looking in, must look like a dog chasing it's own tail. What we need is to be able to identify those elected officials for whom doing what is right supersedes being an elected official. And don't feed me any of that "I need to get re-elected to do more right" crap. I'm not buying it, and you shouldn't be selling it. What we need are men and women who are willing to sacrifice their careers in politics in order to do what is right. What we need are representatives and senators who are willing to be left twisting in the wind as opposed to floating whichever way it blows. What we need are leaders.

Two-fer

Two recent posts dealt with immigration and French president-elect Sarkozy. And here's the one-two: "those who do not like France are not obliged to stay." Sarkozy, as quoted in The Economist, April 21, 2007 p 60.

I'm swooning over the theory. What that means and how it is put into practice is another story; but it's still a h3ll of a theory.

Too sexy...

Right said, Fred. Right said.

Read more. Veracity of these facts is currently disputed. And for what it's worth, read this with a grain of salt:

"Fred is generally playing a version of himself," said producer Mace Neufeld, who has worked with Thompson on five films. "I wouldn't cast him as a Frenchman or a villain."

Not that I'm endorsing someone who isn't even running for president....

...yet. *crosses fingers*


UPDATE:
In order to preserve my unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality, I must make one thing clear. It's the song. That's it.

Sarkozy Wins!

I don't expect many people to be caring about the recent elections in France. It's not really that high on my list of priorities, but I am glad that Sarkozy won. The main reason that people voted against him (at least as far as I've gathered) is because of his "neoconservatism" (read: smaller government, cutting taxes) and that he was too sympathetic to American interests. As far as I'm concerned that's enough to get me in his camp. If you're interested, you can read more. By the way, don't miss that bit about 84% turnout. I've only one word. Dang.

Beyond that, post-election "celebration" (cough) included this. Although this isn't record setting violence (see the last two paragraphs, and recall the young Muslims rioting in Paris last year), this confirms Sarkozy for me, and here's why: the candidate-of-choice for the sort of people who riot, set cars on fire, and beat on cops--that candidate is exactly who I do NOT want elected. The person who appeals to the element(s) of society whose response to not getting their way involves baseball bats and Molotov cocktails--again, not the person I want in office. Even if I were unaware of Sarkozy's conservative background, the fact that his victory pissed off thugs and hooligans to the point of violence, that's enough to earn him a gold star in my book.

May Day

What to say concerning the demonstrations of May 1st?

There's this, and that for starters. And there's the day chosen on which to rally/march/demonstrate. Plus the option for students to leave school (last few paragraphs on the page).

Here are some unformed (though I hope not uninformed) thoughts, specifically referring to illegal aliens and their protests.

First, they have chosen to come to the U.S. (on their terms, not ours), in search of a better life. I don't know how to quantify "better" but I don't think it's necessary. They want to be here in the U.S. as opposed to their native land. I don't feel qualified to speak on reasons for such "migration" but suffice it to say there is a reason and that reason (political, economical, educational, etc.) is valid. Second, they have decided that certain laws of the U.S. are not to their liking, specifically as it pertains to immigration (though I won't rule out other realms/ideas)--hence the rallies.

Yet there is some reason they stick around and protest, and I do have a couple thoughts here.
1) We don't go out and kill, beat or arrest people en masse as might happen in other nations. Ah, the good old U S of A--where guarantees of freedom are not just afforded to citizens.
2) The distaste for certain laws/practices here does not outweigh the distaste for certain laws/practices in their homeland--regardless of what is disliked here, it's still better. There might be a rubber band in your soup at the coffee shop, but it's still better than eating out of a dumpster.
3) In the Burger King "Have it Your Way" world, it's easier for those who migrate to get what they want here than it is to get what they want from the governments of the countries from which they originally hail. So the pursuit of a better life is not the life that is provided, but rather a pursuit that becomes demanding.

So my advice to any illegal alien, for each of these three....
1) Enjoy it, and don't go too far. The LA police will arrest you if the protest breaks out onto the freeway, but as long as it's peaceful and you don't start burning effigies of our leaders, you'll probably be just fine and not at risk of your life.
2) Enjoy it and don't take for granted what you've got here. Things could be much worse if, say, you were back where you started from.
3) Enjoy it and don't overstep your bounds. See Number 2. Treat us like a respectable host, and we'll treat you like respectable guests on your path to citizenship.

Disclaimer: I realize that I'm not the most well-versed or intelligible person in this discussion concerning illegal immigration. I realize that the means of legal immigration are difficult and there's a lot of bureaucracy and red tape. I'm just offering some thoughts.

Baby's First...Nut Fry?

Isabelle isn't ready to eat any meat products yet so she couldn't really enjoy her very first nut fry, at least to the fullest. That's not to say she didn't have fun though. Of course, such a momentous occasion required a few pictures.















Here's Bella and my sister. In the background, wearing the blue hat, is the guy who did all the frying--major props going his way.
















Sure, she can't eat any. But she certainly was intrigued.
















No, it's not like that. There had only been water in the cup and she was just interested in chewing on something. You know how that goes when they start teething.