kimmy

To me the part that sticks out is this: DESPITE claims that he's still undecided, Gov. Paterson is "certain" to pick Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the US Senate, several unhappy contenders for the job have told friends and associates in recent days. The source of the story is the alleged opinion of associates of Kennedy's rivals. US Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan, a would-be Clinton replacement who is backed by several women's organizations, was the most publicly adamant in saying the fix was in, citing a scenario - first outlined in last week's Village Voice - under which Paterson, in a deal with Mayor Bloomberg, a Kennedy friend, selects Kennedy in exchange for help for his own election bid next year. That sounds like a pretty good reason. If you wanted to run for office, having the Kennedy family's connections at your disposal would probably be about as big a help as you could get, right? Then again, if Paterson is perceived to have appointed Kennedy in return for political favors, the backlash in his upcoming campaign could be damaging. Kennedy's rivals might be saying it's already in the bag because they believe it. They might also be saying it because they want to put political heat on Paterson to avoid the appearance of quid-pro-quo. Andrew Cuomo is most popular, Kennedy is most hooked up, and Carolyn Maloney is most qualified. I am guessing that puts Maloney a distant third in this race. Hereditary monarchies are a much older form of government than democracy... Suitable upbringing and clan connections might not be the best means of choosing a leader... but they can't hurt, can they? Hilary Clinton's main political asset is probably that she had access to a big political machine. Ditto Carolyn Kennedy. -k

Your own article said $150 million... http://www.democratandchronicle.com/articl...36/1041/OPINION -k

Nonsense. Yes We Can! All of the messages coming from Washington have so far been extremely positive. Obama has had his people reassuring Canadians that all that "NAFTA talk" is nothing to worry about and that they're really glad that we're their BFF. What are you saying? Is Obama going to create some kind of personal antipathy with Harper because he was Dubya's buddy? Is Obama going to be hostile to Ignatieff because some people think he likes Dubya? Wait, did Americans just elect a junior high cheerleader to be President?! We shall see a President elected to fix the economy do his best to maintain a strong relationship with one of America's most vital trading partners. We shall not see a President who vowed to strengthen America's international relations proceed to pick a fight over something as petty as "you were GW Bush's buddy, so you're not my friend!" If there's friction in Canada-US relations, it'll be because Obama's buddies in Congress want a fight on trade, not because Harper was buddies with Bush. -k

If a gang of blue people robs a liquor store, the fact that it was a gang of blue people might help considerably in locating them. To what extent should the identity of people who have been arrested and charged be hidden from the public? If the suspect is named "Tranh Nguyen" or "Joe Eaglefeather", should that be supressed? Should photographs of suspects be supressed? If there's an element of the crime (say, cross-boarder smuggling at a reservation) that makes the race of the defendant obvious, should those elements of the story be hidden? How far would you take this philosophy? Does it only apply to criminals, or should race and ethnicity be hidden in all situations? If, say, an Asian immigrant makes some academic achievement, should it be hidden that he came from Hong Kong 3 years ago? -k

If an earthquake powerful enough to move the earth's axis by centimeters caused the Indonesian tsunami... If some event powerful enough to change the earth's axis enough to melt the polar ice caps occurs, how likely is it that anybody will be left to worry about climate change? -k

Hyperpartisan hack Heather Mallick is also finding the afterglow of her Obamagasm has faded rather quickly. Man, talk about Lowered Expectations. -k

Animal Alliance / Environment Voters a federal registered political party -k

New poll reveals... Canadians love Obama, but have serious reservations about his policies on trade, Afghanistan, and the economy. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/01/18/obama-poll.html -k

Not specifically, though I recall it bucked unpredictably if it was twisted hard enough. However, I recall it preferring to stay rotating on the same plane, just like gyroscopes, tops, and those wrist-exercise ball thingies. I'm just asking, what giant wrist is going to turn the giant wrist-exercise ball thingie which is our earth? -k

To me this kind of exemplifies that people seem to project themselves onto "hope and change". People don't interpret Obama to represent a specific set of policies, they interpret him to represent things that are great, good, just, and fair. Decriminalizing marijuana fits Bubber's definition of good, fair, and just... so it seems to him that drug policy reform should be a part of the "hope and change" that Obama brings to America. It seems inevitable that there will be a lot of disappointed customers when people find out that hope and change doesn't turn out to mean what they thought it was going to. Whether it be drug reform, wars, trade, middle east policy, affirmative action or probably anything else... starting tomorrow, "hope and change" is no longer a nebulous idea that people can project their own expectations onto. -k

Change.gov is Obama's website. Change.org isn't Obama's website. It describes itself as a networking website for social activism. It does, however, describe Joe Biden as ...one of the Senate's most rabid drug warriors. He is responsible for creating the drug czar (and the Office of National Drug Control Policy). He authored the RAVE act, which extends drug punishments to owners of bars and clubs where drug busts happen. After nearly three decades in the Senate, and despite smart positions on plenty of other issues, Biden refuses to admit that the drug war doesn't work. ...and referred me to this handy article which notes that Obama and Biden also want to revive the Byrne grant drug eradication program, another block grant initiative. At a speech last month in Florida, Obama promised to ensure funding for the Byrne program, adding that it "has been critical to creating the anti-gang and anti-drug task forces our communities need." Although Byrne has not failed to achieve its stated goal (reducing the availability of illicit drugs), it has made drug policing more aggressive and militaristic and less accountable. And by prioritizing raw arrest statistics, the program tends to focus police efforts on low-level offenders instead of major distributors. Making drug enforcement more aggressive and less accountable? Prioritizing raw arrest statistics and targetting low-level offenders? hmm. It sounds as if the Changewagon will not be making a stop in Funkytown afterall. What do I make of it? I guess it shows that lots of pot-heads have computers. Good for them. I hope you're not suggesting that the new President should base his policy decisions on what people are saying on websites. I certainly believe that Barack Obama has more sense and competence than that. -k

Didn't everybody here get a chance to do the "bicycle wheel experiment" in grade 10 physics? Take a bicycle wheel, and hold it with one hand on each end of the axle. Use your thumbs to spin the wheel up to a respectable speed. Then try to tilt the wheel suddenly. Wow! It's really hard! Newton's law about stuff staying in motion, applied in a rotational sense, means that you have to apply an awful lot of force to change the axis of rotation. The earth's axis can't change suddenly. Not that suddenly. Not without God himself grabbing the axle and turning the bicycle wheel. And maybe Toronto will finally become the big American city it's always dreamed of being. -k

Don't get your hopes up, Bubber. I think that Obama's first term will be focused primarily on generating hugs, rainbows, and Disneyesque meadows (as well as addressing the economy, international relations, trade, healthcare, and that sort of thing.) Mark Ndesandjo sounds like a fascinating person, and not just because he's got a parent in common with the President. However, other than performing a song with a title that references drug use at a charity performance, I don't see anything to indicate that he's any sort of drug advocate. And as someone who grew up on the other side of the world from Obama, I wouldn't assume his views are any sort of mirror of his half-brother's on any particular issue. As you'll recall, Barak Obama himself used marijuana and cocaine as a young man... an experience he now describes as his "greatest moral failure." Somehow I don't get the impression that he's going to be interested in legalizing drugs. -k

You've said this a few times... is your view that Canada's tiptoeing around race would have robbed these figures of the urgency of their message? Well, Obama's background has something to appeal to lots of different people. We discussed Tiger Woods a while back... with Tiger pointing out his multi-racial background and saying he doesn't identify himself as a black person at all. Then there was the Colin Powell take on things, which was basically "in this country, if you look like I do, then you're black. That choice is made for you." There might be some validity to both points of view, but certainly the Colin Powell version seems to be the one that defines how Obama is perceived. Obama may mention his white family when it is convenient for him to do so, but he seems content to be defined as a black person in the way Powell explains it. -k

Unless clarified, the claim that "the equator will move north" is absurd on the face of it. What does that even mean? I believe it's known that the historical changes in the magnetic poles took place gradually over centuries. The belief that something will suddenly happen in 2012 just doesn't fit with anything we know about changes that have taken place in the earth's history. Short of a big external force (massive asteroid? Atlas shrugs and tilts the earth on its axis?) that's just nonsense. It sounds as if somebody is trying to cash in on the latest "doomsday" prediction. I know somebody said the world is ending in 2012; I can't recall if it was Nostradamus or the ancient Mayans. -k

I think the presumed superiority many Canadians seem to feel towards Americans in regard to racial issues is simply a product of never having had to deal with the issue to nearly the extent. I think it must be pointed out that "racial issues" and "race relations" tends to be code for "angry black people" in this sort of discussion. Canada has had and continues to have plenty of racial issues of its own, vis-a-vis aboriginals throughout our history, as well as historically the Chinese head tax and Japanese internment, and increasingly at present day with South Asians. The presumption of superiority seems to rest on the US experience with slavery and segregation in the southern states, as well as the fact that black people make up a considerably smaller portion of Canada's populace. Perhaps the history and the larger black population give the black civil rights movement in the United States a level of immediacy that has never been present in Canada. Perhaps the charged and divisive atmosphere that created riots and political movements 40-50 years ago made addressing racial issues a priority in a way it has never been in Canada. Whatever the reason, the battle has been fought in the US, not in Canada. The results of America's struggle with this issue have filtered across the border. American black people sought to be portrayed in a more positive manner in the media, and the results are present on Canadian televisions. Black people in the United States have won higher profile for their artists and music and culture, and the results are available in Canadian record stores and book stores and so on. And now a brown-skinned man has won the top job in the United States, and brown-skinned people in Canada find inspiration. As usual, we're tagging along behind. -k

I was at a Wal-Mart a while back and noticed a young man wearing a black t-shirt with a huge white question mark on the front. At first I thought he might be a proud agnostic, but when I got closer I noticed the fine print on the t-shirt indicated that he was a Wal-Mart employee who would be happy to answer my questions. I asked him if there was a god, and he said he didn't know, so perhaps he was an agnostic after all. He was, however, able to direct me to the electronics department. -k

I think it originated at Politico.com, but nonetheless there's an obvious difference between the tone of the headline and what she actually says. Saying she'll be interested to see whether Kennedy will be put under the same microscope she was is obviously not the same as claiming Kennedy has gotten an easy ride. So why was that headline chosen? I suspect for the same reason that the comment about Couric and Fey has been played up. Controversy sells. Is what Palin said about Kennedy and classism actually out of line? I think Palin was somewhat correct in feeling that class was a factor in the way she was portrayed in the media. I think Palin was also somewhat correct in anticipating that class would play a factor in the coverage Kennedy has received. She was completely wrong in predicting that Kennedy would benefit from it, however. I'd suggest that the coverage Kennedy has received has gotten far tougher in the past week or so. I'm not suggesting that Palin's comments have influenced the media to be tougher on Kennedy. However, I do suggest that for somebody looking at the situation 2 weeks ago, Kennedy's treatment in the media looked probably looked a lot different than it looks now in hindsight. -k

As Argus said early on, the men who are offering millions of dollars to "take her virginity" are the ones who have been clowned. This woman has made a mockery of the idea that a woman's virginity is a precious commodity, and in my view that is an idea that deserves to be mocked. The idea that a woman was "ruined" or loses all her value once she's had sexual intercourse just isn't relevant anymore. It's not an idea that's helpful to women at all. Historically it has been pretty harmful, in fact, and remains so in many 3rd-world hell-holes. I don't agree at all that she's calling all women to put a price on sex. She has highlighted an antiquated notion that still holds some attachment for many in our society. Whether she's satirized it, or just profited mightily from it, the fact that somebody is apparently willing to shell out $3.5 million for sex with a virgin is pretty astounding. As for men "taking their pick"... men already do take their pick, but I think you're wrong on the criteria. For most men, I don't think "she puts out" is much of a concern once they're at a certain level of maturity. Once men are adult enough and confident enough, they understand that they will be able to find willing sexual partners. The possibility that a certain woman might "put out" is of little importance in a world where women are generally quite willing to engage in sex with men they find sufficiently interesting. Of course for highschool kids and young adults, "she puts out" might be a matter of high importance. But I can't picture a man of quality telling his buddy "I've gone out with this girl a few times, and I like her, but I'm not sure that she'll have sex with me..." If a woman can catch and keep a particular man by teasing him with the possibility of sex, I would bet dollars to donuts that the man is probably not worth catching or keeping in the first place. And if teasing him with the possibility of sex is the only strength a woman has going for her in trying to attract a mate, she is probably about the equal of the guy she winds up with. -k

The most annoying phone calls I receive are from my own bank. They call up, I answer because it's my bank and I anticipate they might have something important to tell me. Instead, they ask me a couple of rudimentary questions about my satisfaction with my bank account and credit card, then proceed to attempt to sell me new "services". Insurance on my debts if I should be unable to make payments (if I had debts...) and insurance against credit card fraud and so on. The last one even promised that if I lost my cell phone, they'd pay off charges made to my cell phone account. It's annoying to be receiving a sales pitch under the pretense of legitimate business from a company I already do business with. But what's more serious to me is the possibility that these calls aren't being made by my bank, but by a call center who has been contracted by my bank. If that's the case, how can they ensure the safety of my personal information? If they've given call center employees this information to contact me and ask questions about my bank accounts and try to sell me other financial services... can they vouch for the integrity of employees that they didn't hire or screen in the first place? While it's not nice to generalize, call center employees are often people that I wouldn't even trust to wash my car, let alone handle my financial information. -k

I was wondering. Because the sense I got from watching the interview is completely different from the sense I got from reading the article about it. So it's not a valid complaint? Do you think she's unreasonable in feeling that ridiculing her daughter's engagement was over the line? Don't you think another parent might feel the same way in that situation? Cite? I've searched a bit, and all I've found thus far is the same quote from the interview... I’ve been interested also to see how Caroline Kennedy will be handled and if she will be handled with kid gloves or if she will be under such a microscope also. Which is quite different to the spin seen in some of the reportage of the interview... Palin: Media goes easy on Kennedy Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska) believes Caroline Kennedy is getting softer press treatment in her pursuit of the New York Senate seat than Palin did as the GOP vice presidential nominee because of Kennedy’s social class. -k

So is he going to have her wash his dishes as well, or something? -k

Possibly contacting a travel agent would be a good start? -k

You must be lots of fun on Valentine's Day. You remind me of the classic words of Billy Joel: But you're probably right, it might not seem like such a dumb choice to those of us who are well past adolescence, and who see the starry eyed romance of first love as not nearly as valuable as 3.5 million. Argus is so completely right about this. From everything I hear, most girls' first time falls so far short of "the starry eyed romance of first love" that it's debatable where it's worth $3.50, let alone $3.5 million. Personally, I did save my first time for after I was out of high school, and I saved it for someone who I'd been with for a year and stayed with for another 6 years and who is still one of my most treasured friends. The first time we had sex was not nearly as good as the 2nd, or 3rd, or all the times we had after that. The first time was limited by barriers between my ears, which when removed made sex a far better experience. To be honest, the first time was the one I do kind of wish I could have sold for a medium sized fortune, because it's the one I value the least. While religious kooks of all stripes continue to attach great importance to virginity, for most of us in North America at this point in time the mythology that surrounds virginity is just an odd holdover from a bygone age. -k

Burris was Blagojevich's second black-person of choice for the job, it turns out. His first pick was congressman Danny Davis. Davis turned down the offer, not wanting to be part of the circus of which Burris has participated. Davis, an African American, disagrees with Rush. It's not all about race. Said Davis, "I always said that I don't think it is a seat that belongs to anybody. . . . The person should be who can best unify the state and bring back a sense of integrity and trust. . . . The seat does not belong to any race or any ethnic group or any category of individual. It belongs to the voters." http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/1356051...sweet31.article The Rush mentioned in the quote is Bobby Rush, the congressman who likened the criticism of Burris to a "lynching". -k