A recommendation: last night I switched on the TV half way through Rich Hall's documentary "How the West was Lost" on BBC4. It was fantastic - a look at the frontier mythology and its importance in the American psyche as well as a timeline of western films and how they are informed by / reflect / relate to the politics of the era. It's apparently not yet on iPlayer, but if it does show up I'd entirely recommend watching it.
Courtesy of Wonkette, please enjoy the "World's Dumbest Website": Hillary Clinton Supporters For John McCain (dot com). Even ignoring the terrible URL (hcsfjm to you too) and the web design, which is held back from Internet '96 status only by the lack of a little picture of a stick man digging, it's horrible. And stupid. Really, really, really stupid, in fact. Check the comments.
First, the SCREAMING CAPITALS
I'M JUST CONFUSED HOW THE HELL THESE WHITEYS ARE VOTING FOR THIS ANTI AMERICAN HUSSAIN OSAMA ON THE TOP OF THAT WHO HAS NO RESUME WHAT SO EVER TO BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES, THE ONLY THING HE HAS IS SCRIPTED SPEECH AND THE SCARY ANTI AMERICAN CORRUPTED FRIENDS . I WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR THIS TERRORIST NO MATTER WHO IS IN THE TICKET, I'M VOTING FOR JOHN MCCAIN WE CAN TRUST HIM WITH OUR EYES CLOSED NO MATTER WHO IS HIS FRIENDS ARE NOT HUSSAIN OSAMA AND HIS WIFE
and the CPTLIZD TXT SPK FROM D KIDZ:
HILLARY WUZ CHEATED Y DINT THEY COUNT TEH VOTEZ FROM MI AND FL THAT IS NOT OK 2 DISSENFRANCHIZE VOTERZ LIKE THAT OBAMA IS A MUSLIM DUSNT THAT SCARE NEONE A MUSLM AND PROBLY HAZ TIES 2 TERRORUISTS IN TEH MIDDLE EAST. HIS MIDDLE NAME IS HUSSEIN LIKE SADDAM PPL! HILLARY 4EVER I HOPE SHE RUNS AS AN IND BUT IF NOT I AM VOTING 4 MCCAN.
To be fair, even the hcsfjm editor complained about the legibility of that guy. But then there's the DRUGS!
I'm a small town pizza maker here in Weed, CA.
I've dropped out of the campaign for Hillary with pizza in hand, despondent over the loss of our party to the extreemists of obama.
beside,s he did DRUGS!
We don't need him in the whitehouse, it will be like that mayor from DC Maryan Berry.
Love the idea of "dropping out with pizza in hand", though. Some have done exhaustive research:
I can't stand Obama. If anyone cared to look up his full name on his website, his middle name is Hussein. Who the hell wants a Hussein in as our president. This just goes to prove that our electoral system is so far rigged, it's not funny.
Others have resorted to theology:
I have always said Obama was probably the anti-christ so everyone needs to BE WARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK, I'm ware. What next? Political theory:
Obama equals socialism pushing Karl Marx agenda - take from those who can and give to those in need
Giving to people in need? Heresy. This guy invokes the name of Louis, er, Ferrykahn:
I called a local radio program here called "take a stand" 570 in asheville nc. I called to say why I wasnt voting for Obama. I prefaced by saying that I voted for clinton, gore and kerry, but would not vote for obama because he was a marxist and hung out with ferrykahn.
And then possibly the only time you'll ever read the sentence:
WHERE IS RALPH NADER WHEN WE NEED HIM???
It's mindboggling. Also check out this video, much beloved of the hcsfjm crowd, which includes the damning indictment "With America at war with Islamic terrorism, can we elect a man with not one, not two, but three Islamic names?". At least it doesn't add LIKE SADDAM PPL, I suppose.
Currently reading this. It's an interesting idea and engagingly written, with the possible exception of one chapter in which the author suffers from a minor bout of Gonzo and attempts to stop the crucifiction from taking place in a passion play. In any case, a later chapter mentions this review (currently offline at TNR's site, so sorry for the odd link). Quote:
"Unlike people from religious traditions with long histories of involvement with politics, evangelicals have no firm foundation in history, theology, or experience against which they can judge the words that so easily come out of the mouths of politicians. Sincerity, for them, is everything, which is another way of saying that facts are nothing."
I think this is the one of the more convincing theories I've read to address the seeming concern of many American voters with good intentions rather than good actions; the impulse that drives people to judge leaders based on the idea that they seem to have meant well, rather than the manifest evidence that, however well intentioned they may be, they're leading us into mayhem.
A few days back I had a good old moan about the NF winning thousands of votes in Lewisham. For anyone interested, there's a very interesting discussion on the same subject (also: more cats) on this blog.
This is brilliant, in a rather shouty political discourse kind of way (with that in mind, watch this). US political pundit who compares Obama's policy to that of appeasement is shown up brilliantly as the host demands, over and over again, that he should explain what Neville Chaimberlain actually did. He has no idea. Skip to about half way through if you're short on time.
We found out that Boris had won - or was pretty much guaranteed to win - at about 3pm yesterday when Paddy Power paid out winnings to those who had bet on him winning. How depressing. In the immortal words of Kent Brockman: I've said it before, and I'll say it again: democracy doesn't work.
And so we enter four years of floppy-fringed fascism*. I think London should sit on the naughty step until it learns a little about democratic responsibilities such as actually examining manifestos and not believing everything printed in the Baby Mail, which showed its true colours over the past few weeks.
On a local level, though, there were reasons to be both cheerful and horrified:
Good news: the vast majority of the turnout goes to serious parties that had considered policies for the key issues in the city (although these policies obviously varied in merit): Labour, Tories and the Lib-Dems. Also, good news from my perspective: Labour hold the area.
Bad news: eight and a half thousand people - or 5% of voters - in my area saw fit to vote for the National Front. In nearby Bexley and Bromley (easily won by James Cleverly, a Conservative) the NF candidate took over 11,000 votes. Almost 20,000 people in South East London, then, chose to vote NF.
The NF isn't, like UKIP, simply a party of anti-federalists and simpler "save the pound, God save the Queen" types united in a dislike of Europe - it's a party that wants, according to its website, "Britain to remain a white country". Some of the votes it has gathered might be a mere protest against the three main parties - but wouldn't those who simply want to protest against perceived Westminster cronyism vote UKIP, who also ran in the area?
Although this election shows an obvious swing to the right across the board, almost certainly courtesy of petrol pump paranoia (again, no thanks to Dacre and co) and Northern Rock, I'd be surprised if former Labour voters would swing much further than Cameron's Conservatives out of some generalised fear of an economic malaise or simpler dislike of Gordon Brown. Similarly, although some right-wing Tories might want to move away from Cameron and his hoodie-hugging (he hasn't caught me yet, fortunately) I can't see them moving further than UKIP.
And so we're left with the prospect that thousands of people in this city genuinely want a political party that actually wants to deport non-white people from the UK (or "repatriation of all coloured people currently resident here" as it puts it). And that - however it might be caused - is both a terrifying and depressing prospect and something that needs to be addressed. Given Mr Johnson's past I'm not entirely convinced that he's the right man for the job, but this is something that should concern him and his supporters just as much as it does those of us to his left.
* Yes, I'm aware that Boris isn't a fascist, but I adore asinine alliteration.
In time for tomorrow's election, a few highlights of Boris Johnson's career might be in order:
Other candidates are available. Several - although, of course, not all - are, in my opinion, preferable. It'll be rather depressing if Londoners choose to elect a major based largely on choosing the candidate who has spent the most time on television.
From the Guardian: "Tories unveil US-style ad campaign". Quote:
The full-page advert in the Daily Mail, titled: "Reduce the Pressure", contains the line: "Proper controls on immigration so our public services can cope.
The Conservative party chairman, Caroline Spelman, said: "We believe this campaign shows the Conservatives' commitment to new politics. Our posters, advertisements and the brilliant new film show that we have the fresh ideas and thinking to bring real change to Britain
Ah, yes - if by "fresh ideas" you mean the same old crap, repackaged by another ad agency. And speaking of US-style anti-immigration advertising, let's not forget how far some presidential candidates are prepared to sink. Wonder how long it'll take the UK to follow?
Also, on a completely unrelated moan, "media" is a plural noun, and using the phrase "medias have" on the press information page of a website is guaranteed to drive any passing journalists into a fit of impotent rage, rather than impress them. For fuck's sake.
From the WSJ, a quote attributed to Michelle Obama:
"Barack," she interjected, "Feel — don't think!" Telling her husband his "over-thinking" during past debates had tripped him up with rival Hillary Clinton, she said: "Don't get caught in the weeds. Be visceral. Use your heart — and your head."
Because, as we all know, the last thing anyone could want or need is a politician that, you know, actually thinks.
Also, I came across this in a book on dominionist Christians. It's attributed to one Dee Simmons, who peddles nutritional supplements that are very specifically not sold as being able to cure cancer on a website that has a page titled "Natural Cancer Survival", and she's describing her daughter's wedding:
"There was a huge fireworks display," Simmons says, "but I am too embarrassed to tell you how much it cost. When the fireworks stopped, a quartet sang 'God Bless America.' There was a saxophone solo. Everyone had chills".
This sounded to me like something from a Don DeLillo novel in which a character, designed to represent a particularly loathsome segment of American society, is being set up for quiet judgment and ridicule. I suppose I hadn't realised how closely art mirrors life in this case.
There's much joy to be had from the inanities posted to the BBC's Have Your Say website, but the wonders of user-submitted content go further. Amazon's reader reviews are particularly fine and, if you pick the right book, show up some disturbing truths about the commenters' views on society.
Take, for example, one Clancy-esque thriller about terrorism and the middle east. First, there's inadvertent social and media commentary:
"To me, if the bad guys don't get smacked down in the end, it's not a happy ending … I'm going to wait for [author] to get out of his contract before I try him again; when he finally has the time to write something imaginative and with a little more meat. Until then, though, I'll be sticking with Fox News."
then those with an inability to distinguish between neocon fantasy and reality:
"Spending time in [author's] books makes me want to believe that we actually have people like these out there doing the dirty work that, I suspect, must be done in a dangerous world."
"While the names are changed to protect the "innocent", so much of this book is a timely analysis of current events and a realistic approach to dealing with them."
"[author]'s bread and butter has always been delving deep into the intricacies Middle East politics and [title] excels in that department. Not only was the story and action top notch but it was a real education into the workings of the Iranian government."
.. and then dozens that are just terrifying:
"This is not a book for the squeamish. It is a gritty portrayal of the real world of today's War on Terror and how it is fought in the trenches. It asks and answers the key confounding questions of what is torture and does it work. "
"[protagonist], you see, is an real American. He recognizes that the United States is inherently good and that there are truly evil people in the world. … Anyone who cares about the United States will wish that [protagonist] was real … [he] doesn't care about the foolish laws that keep him from protecting the nation."
"How timely this book is. With liberal democrats insistent on protecting insurgents at Gitmo, undermining CIA, and dismantling protocols that will enable us to fight a non-uniformed, secret, undercover army, this book will give them a dose of reality."
Yikes.