CeeLew Avatar

@CeeLew

Notes

Oh wow, an e-mail from FBI Director Robert Mueller III?! COOL! Better go get my ATM card!

Oh wow, an e-mail from FBI Director Robert Mueller III?! COOL! Better go get my ATM card!

Notes

Here’s Prince melting your face off. Have a great weekend!

Notes

Jail, Arnold Not the Ways to Get Votes

(Note: I’m reposting an opinion column I wrote for the Daily Republic of Fairfield [Ca.], that was originally published on Nov. 12, 2005. It being a small newspaper – and newspapers being the lowliest of Internet creatures – the archives don’t go beyond April 2011. Really. Just found it in an email and wanted to save it for posterity.)

Not that a test case was needed to prove that getting arrested the day before an election isn’t exactly a bulwark of political savvy, but Fairfield City Council candidate Paul Randhawa’s finish Tuesday can most certainly be used as an example.

The 52-year-old businessman finished last with a bit more than 5 percent of the vote in the eight-way race, about 1,000 votes behind 22-year-old Joe Martinez, but comfortably ahead of the write-in candidates - presumably folks like “Yo Mama,” a rat terrier named ”Fluffy,” some guy’s best friend and other notable pillars of the community.

Not to be glib about Randhawa’s sudden and – to most of us – unexpected legal troubles, but it’s simply not good campaign practice.

Randhawa’s arrest, along with his wife and 22-year-old son on a combined 83 counts relating to alleged questionable business practices at his Fairfield travel agency, has to be one of the oddest and most shocking twists in the city’s political history. His explaination of his arrest to the local media, however, provided a bit more shock and oddity. When interviewed in jail by reporters from the Daily Republic and the Vacaville Reporter (which had endorsed him - oops), Randhawa went the conspiracy route.

“The people working against me have been pushing the district attorney to act,” he told the Daily Republic. “That’s why I was arrested today – on the eve of the election.”

Judging by his finish in his last two forays into politics - last out of seven city council candidates in 2003 and last in the 2001 mayoral race - a plot running all the way up to the San Francisco District Attorney’s office to thwart a marginal candidate for a small-town council seems really unlikely.

Randhawa’s statement seems more the kind that comes from a scared man who has a lot to lose, including family, respect, money and, potentially, a huge chunk of his life to jail.

If Randhawa is innocent as he claims – and he is until proven guilty – then he’ll be vindicated in court. If not, then his election eve surprise will be the least of his worries.

•••••••••

Looking beyond Fairfield, it would seem that the major political lesson of the special election in California is clear: Don’t hitch your political wagon on - or anywhere near - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The defeat of Propositions 74 through 77 was seen nationwide as a rebuke of the governor from the voters of California. That’s a stretch. Sure, he’s unpopular, but not so much that voters would simply cast a ballot because of some childish disaffection toward him. People saw these initiatives for what they were - a stunt and a power grab from a governor who wasted his tremendous political capital fighting a battle he couldn’t possibly win.

Schwarzenegger’s main problem was that he chose to fight average folks on issues that affected their very livelihood. Without the boogieman of Gray Davis around, Arnold needed somebody to bully and cast as a statewide evil. His inflated macho side needed to play Conan the Barbarian one more time to swoop in and slay the dread beast with his blade of “reform.”

Unfortunately, he came out looking like Attila the Hun.

The guv’s team made one egregious miscalculation - it’s tough to make teachers, nurses and firefighters out to be the bad guys. Instead of picking on somebody his own size, Schwarzenegger chose to throw down with Johnny’s third-grade teacher, cast aspersions at the guys who worked all day to keep your house safe from a brushfire and badmouth the nice lady that takes your pulse at the doctor’s office.

Again, poor political strategy.

Yes, powerful unions back those people, but taking away those unions’ right to political speech wasn’t about empowering workers, it was about making political inroads in the state for Republicans - the dirty way. Just as limiting teacher tenure was a smarmy backhand thrown at an uppity teacher’s union and the other two initiatives were a badly disguised attempt at political monopoly.

Voters were right to kill all four.

Lessons ooze out of every election. Whether or not they reach the intended targets – often losers who are reduced to a whimpering pile of defeat, broken dreams and bad wine on the campaign headquarters’ floor – is another matter completely.

Jail, however, and nationwide humiliation tend to stick around for a while.

17577 Notes

smokeporch:

Follow this blog, it’s like love at first site!

Yeah. This looks nice.

461 Notes

felixsalmon:

reuters:

Reuters photographer Damir Sagolj has won the Reuters Photo of the Year award for this image captured in North Korea in 2011.
“This is probably the easiest big picture I shot for a long time - it was taken from the window of my hotel room in Pyongyang early morning, just before the sunrise. I knew that portrait was there and I insisted with our hosts to get a room on a very high floor facing that direction. So, all I had to do is to wake up early in the morning, make a coffee, light a cigarette and make sure I exposed well. The scene has this eerie look for maybe 5 to 10 minutes.

This reminds me of the way my heart sinks whenever a good cook explains how easy a dish is to make, saying “all you have to do is, you just…” and then I know I will never, ever, be able to make it. I love the way that managing to wrangle a specific North Korean hotel room, then waking up before dawn, is all part of what makes this one of “the easiest” pictures Sagolj shot. I’ve never been able to get myself a specific hotel room. Anywhere. Let alone North Korea.

felixsalmon:

reuters:

Reuters photographer Damir Sagolj has won the Reuters Photo of the Year award for this image captured in North Korea in 2011.

“This is probably the easiest big picture I shot for a long time - it was taken from the window of my hotel room in Pyongyang early morning, just before the sunrise. I knew that portrait was there and I insisted with our hosts to get a room on a very high floor facing that direction. So, all I had to do is to wake up early in the morning, make a coffee, light a cigarette and make sure I exposed well. The scene has this eerie look for maybe 5 to 10 minutes.

This reminds me of the way my heart sinks whenever a good cook explains how easy a dish is to make, saying “all you have to do is, you just…” and then I know I will never, ever, be able to make it. I love the way that managing to wrangle a specific North Korean hotel room, then waking up before dawn, is all part of what makes this one of “the easiest” pictures Sagolj shot. I’ve never been able to get myself a specific hotel room. Anywhere. Let alone North Korea.

2 Notes

Spiderman. Yeah, why not.
I hate pretentious food people. A lot. So, I felt a measure of great sadness when my girlfriend was told last night, that that the chef at Don Pisto’s would not in any way, alter their delicious hamburguesa. Despite being a Mexican restaurant, Don Pisto’s has what may be the best burger in the city. But you can’t order that delicious burger without the guacamole because, the chef says, it “changes the vision of the burger.”
Ugh. OK. Anyone who says that is a pretentious little twat, but fine. Food is art to some people, especially if you’re a chef, and you can’t go around altering someone’s art. The problem here, however, was that my girlfriend ordered it without the guacamole because she’s allergic to avocados. Her throat swells up when she eats them and, while she won’t die or anything, she’ll have an extremely unpleasant rest of the evening.
We explained that to the poor waiter, who apologetically had to stick up for the chef – who name is apparently Pete Mrabe – by telling us again that the chef won’t alter the burger at all. Even for someone with food allergies. Seriously.
The worst part about it though, was the reason: it will alter the vision of the burger. Really? Where does that stop? If I go in with my father who uses a wheelchair, would it alter the vision of the interior design when they had to move a chair for him? 
I get that a chef has a vision for his hamburger – I personally think that having a vision for a hamburger makes you a too-serious prick, but whatever. Chefs have a reputation for just that. But to put that grand “vision” up against the safety of a human being, and defend that vision so much that it severely pisses off two people that used to love your restaurant?
Eat. A. Dick. … With guacamole.

Spiderman. Yeah, why not.

I hate pretentious food people. A lot. So, I felt a measure of great sadness when my girlfriend was told last night, that that the chef at Don Pisto’s would not in any way, alter their delicious hamburguesa. Despite being a Mexican restaurant, Don Pisto’s has what may be the best burger in the city. But you can’t order that delicious burger without the guacamole because, the chef says, it “changes the vision of the burger.”

Ugh. OK. Anyone who says that is a pretentious little twat, but fine. Food is art to some people, especially if you’re a chef, and you can’t go around altering someone’s art. The problem here, however, was that my girlfriend ordered it without the guacamole because she’s allergic to avocados. Her throat swells up when she eats them and, while she won’t die or anything, she’ll have an extremely unpleasant rest of the evening.

We explained that to the poor waiter, who apologetically had to stick up for the chef – who name is apparently Pete Mrabe – by telling us again that the chef won’t alter the burger at all. Even for someone with food allergies. Seriously.

The worst part about it though, was the reason: it will alter the vision of the burger. Really? Where does that stop? If I go in with my father who uses a wheelchair, would it alter the vision of the interior design when they had to move a chair for him? 

I get that a chef has a vision for his hamburger – I personally think that having a vision for a hamburger makes you a too-serious prick, but whatever. Chefs have a reputation for just that. But to put that grand “vision” up against the safety of a human being, and defend that vision so much that it severely pisses off two people that used to love your restaurant?

Eat. A. Dick. … With guacamole.

1 Notes

How to film primates. This is super cool. I love stuff like this.

Notes

Because it’s Friday and because FUCK YO COUCH!

Because it’s Friday and because FUCK YO COUCH!

Notes

My own view of hate crime laws has evolved over the past 10 years, and I think – as he is wont to do – Andrew Sullivan captures the essence of why perfectly in this video.

When hate crimes laws first started popping up (or at least entering my sphere of consciousness) in the 1990s, I saw no problem with them, because hey, it’s not cool at all to target somebody because they’re black, Mexican, gay, etc. It made sense mainly because the violent act – one could presume – wouldn’t have happened were it not for this aggressor’s hatred and the victim’s gender, race, orientation, etc. And that’s still a valid and pretty powerful argument.

But where hate crime laws go afoul, and why I started to oppose them, is that they don’t punish a crime that has been committed, they punish behavior and speech, and that’s Sullivan’s point in the video. Laws are meant to punish people for crimes they committed rather than their motivations behind the crime. Sure, there’s varying punishment for murder based on premeditation, but that’s a different issue. People don’t have the right to murder people, but they do have a right to hate people, and it’s important to protect that right.

If people’s hate boils over in to violence – just as if someone’s dislike of another person because they’re dating an ex, or said something shitty to them – then they should be punished for the violent act, not the protected thought behind it.

1 Notes

3511 Notes

It’s like the world’s creepiest nesting doll. Good Christ.

It’s like the world’s creepiest nesting doll. Good Christ.

Notes

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

0 plays

Child Hosts The Parasite (Rebel Truth)

NOFX

I love when NOFX goes hardcore.

Notes

“Be real, like ‘Yo I’m gay, what the fuck.’ If you gay you gay. Like that’s your preference, you know? Fuck it if the people don’t like it.”

Fat Joe is awesome. I don’t really care for his music, but I would love to sit and bullshit with him for a few hours. Oh, the stories he could tell.

3 Notes

Mostly, though, I just worry that this uniquely and enormously promising moment will go to waste because a movement so busy falling in love with itself for being horizontal and leaderless will forever remain a movement in which no one person speaks as a representative—and, as a result, will ultimately remain a movement in which anyone who speaks at all speaks representatively—because by and large I’m not convinced the representatives I’ve seen so far could answer the only real question: ‘What is to be done?’
That’s a lot of words, but they’re great words written by Matt Langer over at The Awl, about the problems facing Occupy Wall Street because of it’s radical devotion to … well, non-radicalized protest. This is a great, smart (and dense) piece of analysis.

Notes