Feeds:
Posts
Comments

154914_521103677908009_1581930133_nI am Morgan Freeman. When you put text next to my picture, the words take on an authoritative tone. People see my wise visage and imagine my basso profundo voice and after that will pretty much believe any text that appears next to me, whether it was correctly attributed or not. They remember me in “Unforgiven” and “Driving Miss Daisy” and find comfort in the omniscient voice of reason I offer in every performance. My look of fatherly calm and the feelings of well-being I impart in both their cinema memories and likely their dreams too allows them to temporarily suspend skepticism.

In “Bruce Almighty,” they remember the humility they felt at someone suffering the burdens of Atlas who couldn’t go on, but tried to because they knew that I showed them at their best. I represent calm, the better part of nature. It is easy to use me (and my press photos) because I am likely off promoting some movie and can’t keep on top of every false quote that’s attributed to me.

That makes me a great spokesperson whether it’s voluntary or otherwise, for the patently obvious agenda of whatever particular person actually wrote the source text. So I must ask you, as you look deep into my eyes and trust that everything will be OK: Am I getting paid for this or not?

Devastated

I haven’t posted recently, and don’t really want to post about the Newtown, Conn. shootings today, in which 20 elementary school children were massacred by a gunman while they were trapped in their classroom (along with seven adults). But I also think silence has its own kind of disrespect. So I’ll say only that I’ve been too sick in my stomach today to want to put my feelings into words. It’s something fatherhood has done to me–made me feel protective of every person’s children, since mine could have just as easily been harmed as theirs. To open yourself up to that kind of love for a being, to feel protective of that being, responsible for that being, and know that it’s possible he or she can be taken away from you in a meaningless burst of violence, is almost impossible to reconcile to logic. It makes you want to shut down, give up, go away. Take your child and run and hide.

I am being told that to politicize this patently political problem today is unseemly. That is the conspicuous pile of bullshit being spread by a certain rights lobby, whose defensive posture and rhetoric says more than I ever could about them. I could go on for pages about that. But lucky for them I don’t feel like it. I feel only like being with my small, hopeful, innocent son, holding him, watching over him and spending the next few days trying to remind myself that my plan was to bring him into a good world.  Would that it were always true.

Is This A Joke?

I didn’t know Ignatius T. Reilly was a real person. But evidently he is and he’s writing for The New York Times now.

I’m still trying to decide whether this article is an elaborate joke played on the Times. In it, an apoplectic op-ed columnist opines that David Patraeus is a phony because he dresses well and sometimes rides around in a jet. A real general, we are reminded, eats nails for breakfast and kills people with their bare hands. Like Patton. Also, Patraeus did not conquer Iraq. The author does not explain what that would entail, exactly. It’s not occupying Iraq, evidently, nor purging its dictator. I guess it means we should have killed everybody there. I’m just guessing. But at the very least, it means you are not ever allowed to flirt with any woman, so I assume that warriors don’t have a sex drive or if they do it is completely sublimated into the act of vivid Normandy style ultraviolence at all times. Also, real men don’t floss.

Is this the rant of some guy from the local bowling alley? No. Evidently the writer was embedded with Patraeus in Iraq and is I guess still smarting that the general did not share his entire war strategy with him. The journalist certainly had the right to be offended. I’m sure he didn’t come across as pushy, choleric or passing strange. Not from what I can tell of his trenchant, and not remotely confused torrent of boy taunts. I don’t have a dog in the Petraeus fight. I don’t care whom he screwed or if he retires, nor blame him for the hopelessly politicized wars we’ve undertaken in the Muslim world. I would feel a bit protective of the general, however, if, say, a random homeless person approached him on the street wanting to Indian wrestle, which is kind of what this writer sounds like.

There are a lot of covetous journalists who would love to prize away precious New York Times white space and fill it up with their own kaleidoscopic musings. We are a jealous bunch, we writers. So I hope this does not sound catty when I say I am completely befuddled at how an unfocused pub rant without almost any facts in it somehow spilled like dark bitter onto the paper of record. Either the author knows somebody there, he filibustered a tired editor or (again, my favorite suspicion) this is an elaborate prank. If it’s not, it’s probably the the worst article I’ve ever read in the Times. Ever. And remember, I’ve read Judy Miller’s article where she said she saw a scientist off in the distance pointing at the ground where Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction components were buried. It’s so bad, I’m feeling a wee bit less jealous.

If you want a real story about Petraeus and are ready to leave go the lip-biting sex gossip and windy conspiracy theories, check out Robert Wright’s piece in The Atlantic. If you remember how awful the CIA was some 40 years ago, Wright reminds you that with a little human ingenuity and coalescing of power, it could indeed be awful again.

My cousin Brad Rasmussen has got the attention of some music bigwigs for his musical duo, Chamberlin Birch, which today released their debut album on iTunes, along with the video for their first video, “Falling In Love,” which you can see here:

Backlash

A short note, because I don’t enjoy Schadenfreude as much as I used to:

The backlash has already started, and instead of the soul-searching you might expect from a defeated party, Wednesday saw a lot of GOP wags and conservative Web sites positively refusing to come to grips with what happened to them on election night and refusing to blame the proper parties: themselves. For the past four years, in the middle of a recession with high unemployment, the party had avoided analyzing a flawed deregulation policy and instead rushed to denounce the masses of resulting unemployed people as “takers.” It was a classic “blame the victim” mentality, a textbook example of psychological transference on display in a user friendly, Museum of Natural History-style diorama form. A sick strategy embraced not only by the fringe elements but by the party’s very presidential candidate. Wasn’t this the crew that used to say they were on the side of crime victims?

Here’s a page you might want to check out: “Republican Tears.” Here you’ll find out that gays, brown-skinned people wanting handouts and oversexed females took over the country last night so that the American taxpaxer could fund their nonstop government cheese eating and fucking. (You’ll also see, if you watch one telling video, how Karl Rove forced Fox News to hold off calling an Obama victory when everybody else had. There’s no big conspiracy theory about why: He had personally put millions of donor dollars at stake.)

You might say I’m wrong to overlook good-hearted conservatives by posting the Republican Tears link, and the comments by what is apparently the most extreme element of Republican ideology, tossed in with a few pictures of crying white women. ( Incidentally, I have seen a preponderance of crying white women in the election news photos, even though women overwhelmingly broke for Obama. It looks like somebody’s trying to skew the grief incorrectly. What gives?) But anyhow this Web site isn’t a portrait. It’s a mirror. It’s Republican sentiment taken at face value. Everywhere from Fox News to the vile RedState.com, conservatives are making extremism their identity: The new paradigm after a Wall Street financial collapse caused by complicated debt instruments is to blame welfare mothers and immigrants. This transparent, obvious, age-old smear tactic has somehow become our main talking point in the last few months. It’s as wrong as the kneejerk patriotism argument was during the Iraq War. Wrong, wrong, totally wrong. If you have ever said “takers versus makers” during this election, you are part of the problem.

And I hate to say that by “welfare mothers and immigrants” that it’s a not-so-subtle code for black people. You be the judge. The site Jezebel has been collecting all the uses of the word “nigger” used by angry Republicans on Twitter since Tuesday’s Obama victory.

Again, this kind of argument enrages fair-minded conservatives who insist that their real concern about American debt is short-circuited by horrible liberals playing the race card. I am only a tiny bit impressed by this argument. It’s true, if that kind of argument were really happening. (Specifically, that argument never really happens.) Nevertheless, good-hearted conservatives, you must take note: if you are not racists, the racists are hiding among you. They are using you as human shields to avoid being called out. Their birther, immigrant (and even socialism) rhetoric is a very thin disguise, and if you play into such phony arguments, your supposed good-heartedness is being used against you as a tool of somebody else’s will. There was no honest debate about our recession. The conversations had all turned stupid. It was the Republicans’ fault. That’s why they lost the election. Go to RedState.com (and especially read the comment section of this story) to see if anybody is learning that lesson for 2016.

6 a.m.: Polls open after the five minutes of early voting time in Ohio.

Noon: Lines form around the block in areas hit by Hurricane Sandy and wherever skin happens to be black.

8 p.m. Rep. Todd Akin loses to Claire McCaskill in Missouri, which goes to show, if you bring up the sensitive topic of rape, make sure you know which kind of rape you’re talking about, the good kind or the bad kind.

11 p.m. Fox News pundits say that Obama must take a conciliatory tone with his enemies. The first thing to do would be to compromise with birthers, however that might work out.

11:01 Donald Trump reacts to the news of Obama’s victory with what appears to be Twitter’s first recorded mid-Tweet aneurism or else a garden variety shit hemorrhage.

11 p.m. Miami Dade is tired and wants to go to bed, and doesn’t want to count anymore. Florida already knows what you think about it and its election problems and so has nothing to prove to you and you can wait for months to find out who won in Florida for all Florida cares.

12:30 a.m. Fox News pundits say that America has shown, by electing Barack Obama, that they want politicians to reach across the aisle. Like when Chris Christie hugged Obama after Hurricane Sandy. But actually, Christie is toast for doing that.

1:00 a.m. Romney concedes the race. Fox News says it’s too close to call.

1:04 a.m. We learn that Ann Romney encouraged Mitt to run in this brutalizing, expensive race. Naturally she’s trying to get even with him for making her whelp all those Mormon babies.

1:06 a.m. Ed Rollins says that Bill Clinton left office in disgrace. He’s not sure what for. Was that the Iran Contra thing? Twelve years was a long time ago.

1:41 a.m. Barack Obama, in his victory speech, vows to help the nation’s unemployed, starting with millions of dollars of bailouts to the interests of people like Mitt Romney.

1:50 a.m. Barack Obama has to seize the moment in his victory speech and lay out an agenda and vision for the next four years. But he will likely be spending that time explaining that he is not an immigrant, antichrist, communist, Muslim, zombie, sith lord or clone.

First of all, I want to apologize for not posting more about Hurricane Sandy. My family was spared the blackouts, flooding and buffeting winds suffered by my fellow New Yorkers in Lower Manhattan, and I didn’t know what I could add by talking about how my bourgeois life was only marginally disrupted. (We had no daycare for a few days, and since we were sufficiently gridded, my wife and I had to take up the slack of our work colleagues without electricity.) I have pictures of downed trees on the Upper East Side, but the havoc wreaked on other places such as the New Jersey Shore and the Rockaways make my tiny slice of hell seem far too miniscule.

It occurred to me lately that I could still be of help by linking people to the various volunteer organizations. I probably esteemed my blog too little to think I could help, but I realize every link inspires somebody.

I gave socks, blankets and water to this organization: https://www.wepay.com/donations/in-good-company-hospitality-relief-fund. You can also give through Occupy Sandy. (https://www.wepay.com/donations/occupy-sandy-cleanup-volunteers). Here is another Occupy Sandy page where you can donate or volunteer to help those whose lives have been upended by the storm, whose houses were mauled and who are still going without heat and water as the temperature drops.

The other thing I’m thinking about today, of course, is the election. I was hoping that we were not going to have a close race. That was not simply because I am arrogant about my candidate’s superiority, but because America has remained polarized. When the political center dissolves, it removes an important counterbalance to rigid ideology and partisanship for its own sake, to partisans acting according to the rules of game theory (when they believe everything their side tells them and reject the other side, even when the other side says things that are manifestly true).

There are a lot of last-minute articles hitting the Web that can make you sick if you’re a Barack Obama supporter: in the key state of Ohio, a Republican secretary of state, Jon Husted, has made a last-minute change in the voting rules for provisional ballots that could disenfranchise likely Obama voters and maybe even swing this swing state, this after already shortening early voting hours to make sure that the poll sites were crowded, uncomfortable and foreboding. He’s also installed mysterious new software patches for voting tabulation machines very late in the race.

Meanwhile, a story about the once-distressed auto parts maker Delphi Automotive by Greg Palast in The Nation suggests that Mitt Romney was likely reaping millions off the auto bailout (through a key distressed debt investment) at the same time he criticized the rescue, making cold-hearted comments to the Republican faithful that HE would have let Detroit die without help–rot for its sins of bad management and union hegemony.

All of which Republicans might respond to with a blithe: “So what?” Who cares if Ohio wants to make it tougher for footloose voters and penalize them for their own ballot goofs (even if that particular strategy runs contrary to Ohio law). Isn’t voter fraud a real concern? Aren’t we talking about a bunch of “homeless illiterate winos”? (My friend’s phrase.) But given that some reports say some 40,000 provisional ballots were tossed out in Ohio in 2008, I’d say that’s a lot of winos, even for Ohio, and if it’s true, the state is long overdue for its own Burning Man festival.

They might even say, “So what” to the news about Romney’s investment. After all, doesn’t it prove he’s still a nimble businessman? Mitt made all the money. But it was Barack Obama who gave it away. If Obama is so great why did he not make sure Delphi wouldn’t send jobs to China, gut pensions and basically enrich the vultures who took it over. …

And while we’re at it, they ask, why am I touting Barack Obama in the first place, a man who has kept intact the most loathsome aspects of George Bush’s foreign policy, including a beefed up droning program that can now target American citizens, and foreign civilians, including women and children? How could I support this man? Don’t I have a child?

And they would be right to ask. In many ways, Barack Obama has let me down. But I’m also old enough to know that that’s part of a politician’s job. I have to shrug and insist that Barack Obama’s droning program is not actually targeted at civilians, but at people actually planning bombings and issuing hits on Americans from safe within the bosom of factious countries like Pakistan. I find the outcome loathsome, but not the intent. And Mitt Romney would not change this. In fact, I am sure that Romney, as a foreign policy neophyte, would come under the sway of the same neocons who gave us the Iraq War and make Iran his main issue.

The political process has never been about making infantile demands that a candidate go out and get you what you want. It’s about asking that your views are represented and, when the candidate is narrowed to a choice of two from 300 million, it’s then up to you, the voter to do some work: reconcile your own beliefs, some of which are likely unrealistic and extreme, to those of the body politic. The world can’t be the way you idealize it. If it could be, and you could dictate its terms constantly, you would turn into Adolph Hitler more quickly than you realize, even if you started out as a hippie Rousseauian. Remember what Wayne Coyne of the Flaming Lips said: “You cannot know yourself and what you’d really do with all your power.” It’s important to politics, ethics and the world that you, voter, not get everything you want.

Some of my liberal friends take solace in what Barack Obama has done. He got a famously difficult health care law passed that removed health insurers’ ability to turn away those with pre-existing conditions. He helped save the auto industry. He finally took care of Osama bin Laden, picking up a massive political obligation abandoned by his feckless predecessor. He also went against the tide of loony right and left to save the financial services industry. Sure, it gave ammunition to all naysayers that he made the rich richer with your tax money and rewarded risky Wall Street behavior with your cash. This is true. It’s also true, as far as it goes, to say John Lennon was a criminal, because if you are given to insanely insular, black and white thinking, that’s a true statement. What Michael Moore, Glenn Beck, Mitt Romney and nobody else will say out loud, because it’s uncool, is that a failed banking system would have plunged our country into a nightmare of depression, privation, mass unemployment and crime. This is not an opinion. It is fact. The economic meltdown was a systemic failure where risk was passed around and shared promiscuously by everybody, and the malaise, had it not been stopped, would have ravaged all parts of the body the way septic shock works in a human body, shutting down organs one by one. This chaos would have disproportionately ravaged the poor, not the rich. The Occupy Wall Street Cassandras want to know why Wall Street didn’t suffer in the recession. As I’ve said before, they ignore the fact that there used to be bank called Lehman Brothers that was allowed to die by George Bush and company because of that very same idealism the downtown lefties claim as their own: The bankers must fail. Yet  Lehman’s collapse alone caused much of the panic in the markets, the collapse of stock prices, the wiping out of value, and the eventual decimation of jobs.

By March of 2009, the stock market had bounced back and the recession eventually ended. That left unemployment to tackle. Again, there is something that nobody in the press will say, and the candidates won’t try to articulate, maybe because it sounds too clinical or patronizing. But employment is a lagging indicator. I’ll say that again, because nobody understands it. In the process that is recovery, freight orders pick up first. Small companies take the lead before larger ones do. Companies clean house to boost their stock prices, laying everyone off. When they boost share price, they spend capital first on technology, and when orders come back, they start looking for staff again. For the past 30 years, they have sent much of this staffing need overseas at first. They have a global labor force to choose from now that is much cheaper than the U.S. worker because for years this labor force was locked behind logistical barriers and iron curtains. When things pick up, jobs in America come back online.

This process has become slower in the last 30 years as more work goes overseas. And guess what: There is nothing a Barack Obama or a Mitt Romney can do about it–except hire more government employees, which there is no political will for. When Barack Obama’s enemies gripe that he can’t blame George Bush for his problems anymore, you need give only one answer: “Yes he can, because our high unemployment is still the result of somebody else’s recession and its lagging indicator unemployment. Again, that is not opinion. It is fact. For Barack Obama to make a dent directly would have been to do the thing nobody would let him do: expand government. A lot.

Then there is the other complaint. He should have cut taxes. I’ll stop with that argument here, because he did. What he didn’t cut he kept insanely low. None of you noticed and didn’t read. You don’t deserve any more time on this subject.

I guess when I pull the lever for Obama, it will not be as much for the man this time as I’m voting for the closest thing we have to rationality. I do not believe Mitt Romney is as uninformed, unsophisticated, or irrational as a lot of Republicans. I do not think, if he becomes president-elect tonight, that we’ll have on our hands somebody quite as embarrassing or incompetent as George Bush and Sarah Palin. I believe, though, that he has, whether he likes it or not, become the standard bearer for the worst of American thinking. Neither Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama is going to stop droning. Neither one is going to send anybody in the Wall Street scandal to jail. But the bad ideas and intentions still accrue to Romney’s side of the fence. The idea that Clinton era tax rates are now the devious plot of a socialist “anti-Colonialist,” the idea that global warming reports are a liberal plot, the idea that the only acceptable big government is an overbuilt military, the idea that schizophrenics must have guns to protect everybody’s Second Amendment rights, the idea that rapists must be allowed to see their sperm fructify a victim’s egg, the idea that cheap gasoline is somehow a natural right of Americans, the idea that higher taxes harm the rich at all–this is all garbage thinking that has to be cleaned out almost daily by the process of confrontation, dialectic and due diligence. People who think are constantly bombarded by those who have faith. I’m talking about faith of all sorts, whether it’s that there is a sky god watching over you personally or that a democracy is a self-cleaning oven and that a free market solves every problem by itself. These faiths are always carrion to proof and reason, but the faithful smile knowing that their faith, a priori faith, will never ever have to prove itself. It is both subject and predicate of a meaningless sentence.

If I concede that presidents actually do very little–that they rarely push buttons and that policies then pop out like Pop-Tarts, if I notice instead that they try to ride waves of idealism or discontent through the force of their charisma and personalities, then I feel pretty safe with this statement: Mitt Romney is a horrible presidential candidate. He’s thoughtless in his statements, tone deaf. He doesn’t know when to pick his battles. He doesn’t know the difference between sang froid and heartlessness, at least not when it comes to speaking to a large audience. He doesn’t know when to appear statesmanlike and when to pick a fight. All politicians lie. When Mitt Romney does it, somehow it seems even more opportunistic, crass, dirty and ham-fisted. He may or may not be a man of religious conviction, but one tends to notice not the trail of missionaries he’s left in his wake but all the people he’s fired. He brags about it, after all.

So I will, with a bit of a grudge, be voting for Barack Obama again. In tough times, when the arguments are stupid and miss the point, again, it’s nice to have a competent politician around.

Update: I did vote today, but it took a long time. The lines were full of voters from the areas ravaged by Hurricane Sandy. I also noticed that my election district had changed, which meant I wasted 20 minutes or so in the wrong line. If you are in doubt about where you are voting in New York, you can check out this site.

(API) Model, TV personality, fashion maven and philanthropist Kim Kardashian will soon add another role: author. Along with William Shakespeare, Herman Melville, Pliny the Elder and Ernest Hemingway, Kardashian will enter the ranks of the literary canon after signing a $3.5 million dollar deal with Harper Collins to publish a book of her wit and wisdom on Twitter.

The book, whose working title is “Kim: What A Tweet!” is slated to hit bookshelves next spring and will comprise the best of the “Keeping Up With the Kardashians” star’s sage observations, epigrammatic putdowns, style tips and other eructations.

“Wait til u C my c-thru @Dorkboy.” “Party at Eva’s … @NightStalk bit.ly/tja78.” “Kisses @Robiespierre.”

“This is literature in the 2010s,” said HarperCollins associate editor Precious Denbow. “Kim sits on a perch surveying the world through the lens of an artist. A true visionary listens to her own muse, and you can tell it’s true with Kim, who barely seems to know the rest of us are here.”

“U Turn Mee On @Chinese Noodles Mee pictwitter.com/hlwff,” writes the Armenian bombshell in Chapter 8, titled, “Kim Eats.” “Vintage XOXO RT @PrinceAlbertJacket,” she adds in Chapter 9, “Kim Puts On Clothes.”

Though the book is not yet in galley form, Amy Ritter of the online magazine Salon has been following Kardashian’s Twitter account for the better part of two years. Ritter’s relentless tracing of Kardashian’s “post-omniscient voice” has left her with dark circles under her eyes, a hunched back and teacher arm, but she said it has been worth the degradation of her looks in her late ’20s to remain glued to Kardashian’s every movement, stutter and peristaltic constriction.

“Kim’s got a lot to say. Whether it’s ‘OMG, I love this song.’ To ‘OMG, Faux Fur Friday!’ My generation has become obsessed with her picaresque journey through post racial, post body conscious America. As “The Wasteland” belonged to the Lost Generation and Woodstock to the hippies, Kim belongs to us. She is proud of her body. Proud of her curves. Proud of her explicit sex tape. My feeling is that she’s probably not so proud of her spelling.”

“But hey,” Ritter adds. “This is Kim’s world. We just live in it.”

Critic Harold Bloom says that mainstream publishing has been in a rut, and that Kardashian’s book should have America talking again about the simple joys of declarative sentences, “if that’s what they are.” Deceptively simple, they can in fact be likened to Aristotlian syllogisms, he said, with both major and minor premises forming categorical propositions. “LOL,” he added.

Meanwhile, linguist Noam Chomsky says that Kardashian’s Tweets do follow some logic of innate universal grammar “which is why readers seem to understand them,” he says.

“I ❤ ombre sequins RT @Butterface,” Kardashian wrote Friday morning. “Lashes,” she wrote later, which Bloom says is apparently about eyelashes. “It is plainly in the indicative mood!” he says.

“You underestimate her at her peril,” says Bloom. “If you don’t believe me, maybe her seven figure deal with Harper Collins will shut you up. Bullshit, as they say, walks.”

“Gym ouch RT @FitnessFrance bit.ly/387FF,” Kim wrote in a tweet followed by a bunch of numbers that were likely garbled Hex code. “My nipslip @boo HuffPo instagram.com/72985.”

HarperCollins’ Denbow was asked if it might not be better to publish more books by up and coming authors, betting on 10 fresh talents for a potential breakthrough to compete with the thriving indie book world, rather than offering millions to an untested celebrity author. She laughed out loud.

“What are you, a nun?” she asked.

“Khloe’s rock! Shine! twitpic.com/8whif,” wrote Kim at lunch. “Humphries bad. @BruceJenner.”

Professor Roy Danbury of the University of Connecticut says that Kardashian offers the world a mix of compelling post-structuralist solipsism paired with the promise of playful tit and ass pictures that have captured the zeitgeist of the times: “We stare because we cannot help it,” he says. “Her teasing Tweets are like neurotoxins, paralyzing us into torpid, numb stupidity as she looks over her shoulder upon her own ass with the gimlet-eyed stare of  Callipygian Venus, marble faced with amazement, indifferent to the pain she causes. Why waste time with a guy like Shakespeare talking around the issue?”

Danbury added that he’s written six historical novels about post-Commune France, but as of right now cannot find a publisher. He often contemplates suicide.

“Tickle @Kanye,” Kim tweeted.

Click here for a quick clarification on this story.

–*If you apologize to an old lady for running her over with a car, you are apologizing for American values.

–*If you’re going to do the necessary job of cutting military spending, it’s better to do it from the labyrinthine offices of a giant bicameral building where nobody can see you, so you can blame the person who signed your cuts. That’s much better than sitting in such an easily recognizable big “white house” which will attract attention and scorn.

–*Joe Biden did not support the Iraq War. We invite you to go to the Congressional Record and unlearn that now.

–*Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan agrees with the Obama administration’s policy of sending no troops to Syria. But it is indefensible that in doing so, Obama has not yet called the French-controlled U.N. a bunch of cheese-eating surrender monkeys.

–*Paul Ryan wants to cut loopholes for the rich. By “loophole,” he’s using the Webster’s definition–a small opening through which a firearm can be fired, most likely at the poor people coming to steal the rich person’s food.

–*Paul Ryan does not believe you can separate religion from politics, a point of view that places him squarely in the tradition of other Ottoman sultans.

–*We learned from Paul Ryan that unemployment continues to go up and Lindsay Lohan is currently dating Samantha Ronson.

–*Paul Ryan says that Barack Obama’s intelligence failures on Sept. 11 were indefensible. He will not clarify which September 11.

–*Joe Biden’s continued laughing is highly distracting to many viewers, who insist it was disrespectful right at the point they were just getting mesmerized into non-critical thinking.

–*Moderator Martha Raddatz kept the candidates’ feet to the fire, especially when she called upon them to bravely make obeisance to a sky god.

–*Iran is a rogue nation and theocracy on the verge of gaining nuclear weapons. Obama has tried to introduce sanctions, but according to Ryan, that’s not fast enough. The sanctions must be faster than a centrifuge, Ryan says.  We’re talking 1065 hertz!

–*Obama might have been introducing worms and using other covert methods to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program and cripple it, but according to Ryan, the Obama administration has no credibility with the Iranians. When asked to define credibility, Ryan says it is not about bombing or threatening invasion or killing scientists … no “credibility” is just too difficult to explain and he will fill in the details later when he is vice president.

–*We’ve had 8% unemployment since January 2009. Most economists would see that as a lagging indicator of a credit-spurred recession. But that’s a long sentence. “Obamacare” is much shorter and easier to say.

–*Actually now unemployment is 7.8%, which just doesn’t have as much polemical magic as August’s figures did. Shit.

–*We learned that when the going gets tough, Joe Biden can come out and give the fight of Barack Obama’s life.

–*Paul Ryan plans to cut the same amount of Medicare as the Obama administration. But at least it won’t be rationed. It will just be gone. And you can take that to the bank.

–*Reviewers were relieved that, in this post-racial world, two filthy Irishmen can now have a spirited argument in public.

Secularists have continued to argue that the motto “In God We Trust” on U.S. paper currency violates the First Amendment’s clause prohibiting the establishment of religion. What are some of the other mottoes that have been considered.

–*U pluribus unum

–*Spiritual but not religious

–*Money talks

–*Because we say so

–*Shazam!

–*Boo-yah!

–*Everybody dance, now!

–*Nothing gold can stay

–*Backed by gold … not!

–*Backed by fuck you

–*All law is founded in violence

–*Redeemable for five ski ball tickets

–*Existence precedes essence

–*For use as legal tender and artificial currency deflation by China

–*Your mama

–*Love means never having to say you’re sorry

–*Liberty, fraternity … let’s stop with two

–*You like me, you really really like me

–*I never promised you a rose garden

–*Only the strongest survive

–*Remember the Alamo

–*No regrets

–*Seize the day

–*Fished you in! Get the net!

–*Take me to the place you cry.

–*Put this where your heart used to be.

–*Amen and pass the ammunition.