Storybook minute: Dube vs. Dube

A few weeks ago I got to see my good buddy Matt "Doobie" Dube in Seattle and Whistler. There were a lot of highlights, but by far the most-photographed was his run-in with Dave "Doobie" Dube at the Japanese Steakhouse.

Dave took it upon himself to steal Matt's wallet just before we left, and string him along all through dinner until the bill came, when he sneakily paid for Matt's dinner using Matt's credit card. Matt stared at the card in disbelief, and then went and sat by himself for a while to show his appreciation for his older brother's trickery.

After we left, Matt challenged Dave to a fight.

Actually he pretty much just went for it--

--and was subdued by his less-intoxicated bro.

All-in all it was a great weekend--wish you were back here already Doob.

Obama/McCain voters, bane of Democracy

Jenny and I have a long-running conversation where we try to place blame for the failed state of our Democracy. I'm constantly tempted to blame it on those in power: politicians who manipulate the public into voting against their interests; corporations who warp elections with their outsized pocketbooks; and the mainstream media who ensure that the level of discourse never threatens to become substantial.

I don't want to paraphrase Jenny too much, but her point, which I've never successfully argued against, is that these situations persist because most people are just willfully ignorant. I think there's a lot of truth to that. Most people would rather watch Tila Tequila than read even a little. Even if we expose ourselves to more sources of information, we won't have an informed public until we can think critically, too.

Anyway, nothing makes me angrier and sadder than when I overhear the following sentiment (which I do frequently) from a loyal Obamaniac:

"If Hillary wins the nomination, I might vote for McCain, or just sit this one out."

There's so much idiocy inherent in that statement that I'm not even sure where to begin with it, but I'll try to translate it into something that looks like a coherent (though still idiotic) thought. Here is my approximation:

"I don't really know much about the issues. I'm not very informed, but hey, don't blame me. The mainstream media keeps feeding all this personality-based drivel. I'm too lazy to do anything about it, so I'm just going to decide based on that. So anyway, I'm supporting Obama. He doesn't have any serious policy differences with Hillary, but I like him better for vague reasons. However, if Obama doesn't make it, I'll pick someone totally different. If the so-called issues mattered very much to me, then obviously I would vote for Hillary, but since they don't, I'll vote for McCain. He's very popular with the media too, so he must be a really swell guy."

That's what I imagine these people are thinking. This article in Salon does a nice job of describing the phenomenon, although it fails to identify it as a serious problem.

Anyway, here are some other things such an Obamanatic might say:

• I really want a steak, but if they don't have that I'll fast.
  
• What movie should we watch, Requiem for a Dream or Bambi?
  
• I'm going to ask her to marry me, but if she says "no" I'll become a homosexual.

Special Bill Kristol Sub-commandment VI a

Nice clip from Gary Kamiya's Ten commandments of Iraq:

Commandment VI
Do not allow neoconservatives anywhere near Middle East policy.

Neoconservative ideology, the pea-size brain that drove the Bush administration Stegosaurus, is a weird amalgam of Wilsonian idealism, historical ignorance, American triumphalism and an Israeli-centric worldview. In practice, what these ideas amounted to was "America must hit the Arabs in the face to teach them a lesson." This was not a good idea.

Special Bill Kristol Sub-commandment VI a
Stop giving these buffoons prestigious jobs on newspaper-of-record Op-Ed pages, top magazines and television shows. They have been completely and consistently wrong about everything. Must we continue to be subjected to their pontifications?

True, I'd rather live in a world where neocon screeds existed only in The National Review and The Weekly Standard-- but then what would I blog about?

Gold's Gym is shady

Jenny and I recently signed up for 24-Hour Fitness, so I had to cancel my membership with Gold's. I went to the gym and told them I wanted to cancel, only to find that in order to do so, I needed to place a call to a descriptively-named company, ABC Financial.

I figured this was a bit of a hassle, but not a big deal. However when I called ABC Financial they wanted me to send a cancellation notice via certified mail. I talked to the supervisor long enough to figure out that she couldn't or wouldn't help me, so I guess there's going to be some certified mail in my future. My only hope is that my membership actually gets canceled when I do this. Others in my situation have not been so lucky.

The reasons for ABC Financial's shady practices are fairly obvious, but if you are naive, stupid, or your name is Sheila and you just spoke to me on the phone for 10 minutes, you can see ABC's mission statement on their website:

"Our company mission is two-fold: to be the resource for cutting edge technology in the health and fitness industry, and to collect the most money from the most members, every day."

Frankly, Sheila, I am shocked. You said this was for my protection! You said that only by raising the specter of Federal mail fraud charges could we deter the evildoers from surreptitiously canceling my Gold's Gym membership and depriving me of my God-given Freedom to bounce on the elliptical machine! But it was always about the money, wasn't it, Sheila? You never really cared about Freedom. (She really did say it was for my protection.)

Anyway, besides the fact that ABC Financial/Gold's Gym hate Freedom, and would probably give terrorists a nuclear weapon as long as they signed a two-year contract, it's not a great gym.

Specifically, the Seattle Gold's Gym in Capitol Hill is a mediocre little gym. There is no free parking. There are only a few treadmills and ellipticals. Most of them are in less than stellar shape, and a lot of them are broken outright. Some of the weight machines are broken. A new membership there is more expensive than 24-Hour Fitness which has none of these problems. (24-Hour Fitness is a bit crowded, but otherwise a superior gym.)

So yeah, if you're thinking of signing a contract at a Gold's Gym anywhere, be very careful, and if you're thinking about the Seattle Gold's Gym in Capitol Hill, that's my two cents.

Charles Krauthammer, demagogue for peace

In today's Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer proposes a strategy for containing Iran which is as meaningless as it is ignorant. His bold idea: to declare that if Iran attacks Israel with nuclear weapons, then we will respond in kind. That is his stated purpose anyway. The real agenda is to recite history-as-narrative, casting America as the unsullied hero and Iran as the irredeemable villain.

The first unstated assumption (of this piece and so many others) is that Iran is the wild-eyed aggressor. The mullahs, or at least some of them, are "apocalyptic and messianic." Unlike our former enemies the Soviets they are not rational actors. Ahmadinejad is a jihadist. The second assumption, which is so ubiquitous that it is barely stated, is that America is merely the defender of peace in the Middle East. Our motives are selfless, and our actions are righteous by definition. Unless you accept these assumptions, the piece is laughable at face value.

Krauthammer states that a nuclear Iran will "deeply destabilize" the Middle East. The idea that a pro-U.S. commentator is accusing another country of destabilizing the region is downright absurd. And one of his reasons is that it will leave Israel's nukes on hair-trigger alert. So Iran's theoretical nukes are dangerous because they increase the chance that the actual nukes that we gave to Israel will be used.

In order to make his "contribution to nuclear peace," Krauthammer would like Bush to use John Kennedy as his role-model. His reference to the Cuban missile crisis is more accurate than he realizes. Following the America-as-hero model, Kennedy was merely the victim of unprovoked Soviet aggression. The idea that the United States provoked the Soviet Union by basing nuclear missiles in nearby Turkey is not admissible as evidence because it runs counter to the prevailing narrative. Similarly, it would be unthinkable to mention that the United States' past aggression against Iran might in any way have led to the current state of affairs.

As a side-note, I think it's cute when advocates of unchecked American power cite the U.N. as justification for anything, as Krauthammer does here. For reference, here are forty-some UN Resolutions critical of Israel which the US vetoed.

All this talk of deterrence is amusing, because it comes so close to acknowledging the real use of Iranian nukes: to deter the U.S. from attacking Iran. Instead of admitting that there might be some rational reason that Iran wants nuclear weapons, Krauthammer plays the Holocaust card:

"As a beacon of tolerance and as leader of the free world, the United States will not permit a second Holocaust to be perpetrated upon the Jewish people."

No matter that the U.S. knowingly permitted the first Holocaust against the Jewish people. This should in no way infringe upon our status as "the nation that has liberated more peoples than any other." Krauthammer paints his opponents as "those who see no moral principle underlying American foreign policy."

It should be obvious that this is propaganda--uncritical, jingoistic, pro-U.S. propaganda. There is no moral principle underlying foreign policy, ours or any other country's. Whenever someone says that there is, we're being lied to and sold something we don't want (see: Operation Iraqi Freedom.) The fact that people like Krauthammer, William Kristol, and David Brooks have any credibility, and are regularly published in our most respected newspapers should tell us something about our level of awareness as a society.

Nobody is pregnant, pen spinning is real

I was had this morning. Jenny IM'ed me to say that her sister is pregnant and wants to come live with us. I jumped into action in my role as supportive boyfriend, only to have her laugh at me, a lot, when we went out for coffee.

I'm definitely gullible, but in other ways, I'm too not-gullible. I was ready for the NPR April Fool's fakeout this morning. When I heard that the Pen Spinning Association of Japan had crowned a new champion, I thought I was in on the joke.

Pen spinning is real, nobody is pregnant, and I am 0-for-2. Happy April Fool's everyone!