No one seems to be paying much attention to the games this summer -- symptoms of our growing isolation, methinks -- but this caught my eye:

The New York Times: Puerto Rico Upsets United States Men

I don't want to sound unamerican, but there's a hint of justice about all this. The US "dream team" always seemed a bit haughty to me. I like the idea of the Olympics a lot, and building an all-star team of pro-ballers seems a slap in the face of the Olympic tradition.

Of course, the Puerto Rican team was led by Carlos Arroyo, who plays for the Jazz, so it's not a cut and dry situation. Nevertheless, the instinctual part of me which always roots for the underdog is pleased.

Record turnout is expected in Venezuela as the people go to the polls to decide whether or not to keep populist Hugo Chavez in power.

The election pretty much breaks along class lines. The media/political consensus in the US is pretty anti-Chavez, not surprising considering he's bucked Washington's policy priorities and is buddies with Fidel. On the other hand, if you look at the relative conditions in places that went along with US Central/South American policy -- Nicaragua, El Salvador, Argentina, etc -- vs places that directed their own affairs -- Cuba, Venezuela, Brazil, et al -- it's pretty hard to argue that the advice coming out of DC was sound.

It will be interesting to see what happens. There's a lot of hype on either side of this, but it seems to me that most of the negative stuff about Chavez seems to be scaremongering, fear about "what he might do" rather than problems with what he's actually done so far. Venezuela has a lot of oil wealth, and he seems to be attempting to use this to bring up the general standards of living.

Here's some more interesting perspective in an interview on the state of politics throughout Latin America. I found this exchange particularly interesting:

The Global Justice Movement is wary of Chávez’ populism, his military background, and what they fear may become a top-down ‘revolution’ that excludes the grassroots. How do you think the GJM and Chávez can be reconciled?

As long as the poor in Venezuela support this government it will survive, when they withdraw their support it will fall. But I think it will be useful if the Global Justice movement—and there are many different strands in it—came and saw what’s going on here. What’s the problem? Go into the shantytowns, see what the lives of the people are, see what their lives were before this regime came into power. And don’t go on the basis of stereotypes. You cannot change the world without taking power, that is the example of Venezuela. Chávez is improving the lives of ordinary people, and that’s why it’s difficult to topple him—otherwise he would be toppled. So it’s something that people in the Global Justice movement have to understand, this is serious politics. It’s pointless just chanting slogans, because for the ordinary people on whose behalf you claim to be fighting getting an education, free medicine, cheap food is much much more important than all the slogans put together.

So I'm interested to see the results, and even more interested in seeing if they can resolve the divisions, if real progress can happen. In this country we think we're divided, but people have died in Carachas in political streetfights. Here's hoping that democracy allows people to steer their destiny with other means than violence. I think it's dead-on that unless shit happens people get turned off to the political process really quick.

That's what we've got a lot of in the USA, I think. After three decades of innefectuality on the left and a highly organized media campaign from the radical right, here's a broad class of people who don't believe there's really any such thing as good government. Millions are apathetic, thousands are radicalized beyond the point of vesting in any structured systemic progress. My work really comes down to reconnecting people to the idea of the Public, but without results it's going to be a hard sell going forward.

The Girth is back from South East Asia. Spent some time chasing the dragon in Cambodia, trecking the Laotian mountains and scuba diving in Thailand. Came back with a Travis Bickle look and some bad-ass pictures:

Lots of good stories too, like what the customs agents thought of this photo when they saw it while searching his stuff coming back into the US.

Dr. Leonard Peikoff is the world's foremost authority on Ayn Rand's philosophy. You may be interested to hear the good doctor's view on the 2004 presidential election:

This 19 minute statement presents Dr. Peikoff's view of the upcoming Presidential election, explaining why he intends to vote for Kerry, and why he condemns not only Bush, but also those who abstain from voting on the grounds that both candidates are no good.

The tectonic shifts in politics brought abuot by the Bush Gang's radical power grab continue to rumble on. This won't be the last double-take of this election season.

This jumped out at me through the glory of Google news: Kerry seeks new tactics on war in Iraq, while Cheney prefers destruction!

Cheney needs to understand that military force does not always solve conflicts and a more sensitive approach does not have to mean a soft option on terrorism. His comment "Those who threaten us and kill innocents around the world do not need to be treated more sensitively. They need to be destroyed" is a good example of a man who is not prepared to explore all the options.

Now, we all know that Dick Cheney's Alive, but even the Rooskies have realized he's also over the effin' top.

If you wanna do something to get a more sane international posture going, get involved in this election. I know some of you have been considering it, and I've gotten a lot of kudos for doing what I do from friends and family, but the truth is that if it's just me it's not enough. Many of you will have to step up in some way (there are tons of options! ask me if you need help!) if we're really going to get things working right here in this country again.

If you've ever considered becoming politically active, now is the time to go for it. Who knows; it might even be fun.

So, this comment really got me thinking about the state of the cultural divide in this country. It's quite interesting, and at Brookelyn's advice I checked out Relevant Magazine.

It's interesting and well designed and really seems to represent a demographic, and I fucking love the politics, but... but what? Well, as much as I like what I'm seeing, and as exciting as it is, I still get the feeling there's some work to be done on the cultural tip.

An object example: tonight after watching my new reason to love America, The Daily Show, Dan whipped out Harold and Kumar go to White Castle. It's a pomo, low-budget goofball comedy and oddly likable commercial for the (in)faimous hamburger chain in the name, and surprisingly I kind of liked it. I liked the messages. It made me laugh, and it contained a great deal more wisdom that American Pie.

So it's serindipidy that I stumble over to this progressive christian magazine and see this: a review by Linsday Goodler. She didn't really dig it, and the terms she used were, I think, a little harsh.

This particular part of the film shows just what White Castle tries to accomplish: It makes wicked things seem beautiful and morality seem ugly. It's interesting that the ugliest character in the entire film was someone who was actually helping them. It's also intriguing that his wife, one of the most beautiful characters in a physical sense, was willing to commit adultery with two men while her husband was standing outside and pictures of saints and Jesus on the walls of her home seemed to watch her.

It's a raunchy scene, you can imagine, but I think Linsday is missing the point, and really jumps the shark when she says the point of the movie "makes wicked things seem beautiful and morality seem ugly."

The scene is also pretty misrepresented to make it seem much less comic and far more ugly than it was. The kids loose control of their car after Harold forces Kumar to speed away from the girl that he has a crush on. They're lost and in the woods, when a tow truck appears. They're glad to be saved, but the driver's really a character. He's covered with pussy boils, has a wild pentacostal attitude. His friends call him "freakshow" and the boys are terrified of him.

They get to his house and he mentions they can "fuck his wife," who turns out to be beautiful, fell for "freakshow" because of his voice in choir practice (we hear him break into another song; sounding genuinely enthused) and loves him in spite of his boils and has been married to him for years. After a moment of confusion she asks the kids if they want to fuck her or what, which they're adolescently excited about. Turns out they got more than they bargained for when she demands them both at once, and then Freakshow returns and rather than being angry suggests a four way.

Like I said, it's a raunchy scene, but it's quite funny and the only nudity is a brief gratuitous but not un-tasteful topless moment. And I think the message is positive! Freakshow and his life love one another -- chior practice is a good place to meet good women -- and they know how to have a good time. You're reminded not to fear ugly people, or those lead a different lifestyle from you. You're taught to be careful what you wish for when it comes to sex. All these things are great for people to see.

Personally, I think the film was relatively intelligent, definitely daring, and above average both in terms of quality and message from a social standpoint. The intellectual content of the film is about the pursuit of happiness, its ideosyncracies, false paths, and eventual merits. The film is essentially about living up to your potential, which I think is a basically good message to have.

So is there a cultural divide? I don't know; the only substantive difference seems to be over vulgarity, which to me is really more an issue of style than anything else. I think we can work thorugh differences of style, though it's hardly a trivial. I think we're all relevant in the future.

DICK CHENEY'S ALIVE!

avn't seen it yet, clicky clicky. Warning, the song will get stuck in your head.

DICK CHENEY'S ALIVE!

avn't seen it yet, clicky clicky. Warning, the song will get stuck in your head.

The Doctored Clip Sean Hannity Doesn't Want You to Know About - Center for American Progress

It was this kind of bullshit -- the removal of context to create a false impression -- that sunk my man Dean in the end. But this really isn't about Howard, it's about the way in which the right-wing media operates. They're happy to distort and mislead as long as it serves their agenda (whatever that is). Not only is this reprehensible from a purely ethical standpoint (e.g. throwing sand in your opponent's eyes), but it also does damage to the state of public affairs and public debate, and as such is a real threat to our democracy.

Why?

CNN.com - New Jersey governor reveals he's gay

Total. Bullshit.