Eclecticism

Take, for instance, oh — purely at random, really — George Bush.

George W. Bush last Feburary, on Meet The Press (emphasis added):

Russert: If the Iraqis choose, however, an Islamic extremist regime, would you accept that, and would that be better for the United States than Saddam Hussein?

President Bush: They’re not going to develop that. And the reason I can say that is because I’m very aware of this basic law they’re writing. They’re not going to develop that because right here in the Oval Office I sat down with Mr. Pachachi and Chalabi and al-Hakim, people from different parts of the country that have made the firm commitment, that they want a constitution eventually written that recognizes minority rights and freedom of religion.

George W. Bush yesterday , Rose Garden press conference:

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Chalabi is an Iraqi leader that’s fallen out of favor within your administration. I’m wondering if you feel that he provided any false information, or are you particularly —

THE PRESIDENT: Chalabi?

Q Yes, with Chalabi.

THE PRESIDENT: My meetings with him were very brief. I mean, I think I met with him at the State of the Union and just kind of working through the rope line, and he might have come with a group of leaders. But I haven’t had any extensive conversations with him.

(via Atrios)

iTunes: “Where Do the Boys Go? (Extended)” by Men Without Hats from the album Collection (1984, 6:20).

It’s more than a little bizarre when the most convincing explanation I’ve seen yet of Bush’s actions in office is that he is actually an Iranian agent…

Surveying the vast wasteland that George W. Bush has made of American governance, even the most sophisticated observer is driven to ask, like the simple son at a Passover seder, what is all this?

The most compelling hypothesis so far is that we have not one president but two. Or, rather, two shadow presidents. Domestic policy is the land of Karl Rove — ruthless, cynical, malign yet cunning. As Paul O’Neill has told us, politics trumps principle at every turn, and rather than the agenda of small-government conservatism, liberal ideas and programs are turned into a disciplined machine aimed at securing Republican hegemony and corporate profits.

Abroad, however, we are in Dick Cheney’s world, where grand visions meet a naïveté that would be almost touching had it not gotten so many people killed. In both domains, a disregard for the facts dominates, but whereas the home front features well-crafted lies aimed at securing the president’s political future, on foreign policy the administration seems to be genuinely out of touch with reality. I, myself, badly misjudged the Iraq War out of false overestimation of Bush’s cynicism. Surely, I thought, the naysayers were wrong and the war would turn out well, for it clearly wasn’t in the president’s political interest to produce the current debacle.

But while the “two presidents” theory has some merit, it is unsatisfying both intellectually and emotionally. As in physics, where quantum field theory and general relativity coexist uneasily, we yearn for a grand unified theory of Bushism that would put the two halves of the agenda together. Now, at last, with the revelation that Ahmad Chalabi has been passing intelligence information to the regime in Iran, the opportunity presents itself to construct just such a unified theory. The truth, hard as it is to accept, is that Bush is an Iranian agent.

Admittedly this theory suffers from a lack of direct empirical evidence. Nevertheless, by presenting this single bold conjecture, we can explain everything in a neat, tidy package. By Occam’s razor, then, the theory must be accepted. Hear me out.

It’s so far-fetched that it can’t possibly actually be true, of course.

Or could it? ;)

(via Atrios)

iTunes: “III. Allegro fugato from Sonata No. 5 in D Major for Cello and Piano, Op. 102, No. 2” by Ax, Emanuel/Ma, Yo-Yo from the album Sony Classical: Great Performances 1903-1998 (1983, 4:47).

A conversation this morning…

D: i have a question

Me: i’ve got an answer
let’s see if they match

D: part of my reluctance to vote or even spend the time educating myself in preparation to vote is my assumption that the election comes down to the electoral college, thus making the public vote essentially worthless. true or false?

Me: there were times when I’d have agreed — I’m no big fan of the electoral college system — but if nothing else, the 2000 situation in Florida should (to me, at least) make it clear that the public vote does count…it’s what determines who gets the electoral votes, after all

D: ok, so tell me how the public vote affectes the electoral process

Me: lol this always makes my brain hurt…but I’ll give it a shot

D: hheheh

Me: each state has X number of electoral votes, determined by population
the popular vote determines how the electoral votes are cast
if the majority of a state votes Dem, the electoral votes are cast for the Dem nominee
(which is one of the reasons I’m not a fan – I’d prefer it if the electoral votes were split roughly by how the popular vote went…so, if a state voted 2/3 Rep and 1/3 Dem, the electoral votes would also be 2/3 Rep and 1/3 Dem, rather than all Rep)

D: ahh

Me: some states might split the electoral votes already, in fact – I think some do, but i’m not entirely sure
It’s a goofy system, but it’s the one we’ve got
and sitting it out…well, no personal offense, but I have no respect for people who voluntarily give up their right to have a say – my feeling has always been that if you don’t vote, you’ve got no right to bitch about the outcome

D: oh, i agree. while i might (and sometimes do) complain about how bush is an idiot, i have no right to do so since i didn’t vote for or against him

Me: lol (though I do like that you do bitch — means there’s more of a chance of your voting against him come november (which you should (dammit (grin)))) lol

D: LOL

Me: was that enough parenthesis?

D: very nice

Me: ty
if you’re really bored, I could look up some of my old soapbox rants about voting lol
i grew up in Alaska, where in many very real ways, my vote didn’t count
never stopped me, though

D: perhaps one day i’ll get informed and vote
maybe even this year
w’ll see

Me: you should

D: i know i don’t want bush in office again, but i don’t want to vote for just anyone, either
if you can find me a site that lays it all out in a clear, concise manner, i’ll read through it all and see if i can’t decide which person i feel would do the best job in office

Me: hmmm…not sure if there’s any one particular site…i’ll see what i can come up with, though

D: :)

Me: actually, mind if I blog this?

D: nope

Me: might be the easiest way…put out a call for suggestions

So, folks. Any suggestions for my friend?