Showing posts with label John Edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Edwards. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Baby Gosling



Here is what you get when you Google image search "baby Gosling." First of all, why are you searching for that? That's redundant. All goslings are babies, dummy. Second of all, what the fuck is up with these images? None of these fucking goslings are cute. Why are their abs so undefined? Who knows. Fuck those goslings. What you're I'm really looking for of course is this. Look at that tinysexy! His shirt is so big! Timberlake towers over him! Is that Britney at the end? She towers over him too. (Btw, I never had Disney Channel as a kid, so even though 95% of this blog is pure pop culture nostalgia, this isn't an example of that.)

I've been on hiatus from the blog for a while, I know. And after a while, I got to thinking, when I make it back, it has to be big. Some kind of magnum opus. Will I finally sit down and write that careful reflection on John Edwards -- whom I lionized in this blog? That fuck-you column about how I was right -- 100% right -- about Barack Obama, you fucking fake-ass, horse-race liberals? (I was right. Seriously. Shut the fuck up. I was right.) No, I am going to write about my questioning my sexual orientation. I think I love Ryan Gosling. Putting aside the fact that he's white and kind of blonde-ish....he's...he's....he's....Canadian. I am a mapleleafsexual. Kill me now.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

A Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name (Tar Heels and Blue Devils)

E, Let me cut you off at the pass. Yes, I'm a young, vulnerable, impassioned John Edwards supporter and I graduated from Duke, but I did not have sexual relations with that man.

Monday, August 18, 2008

Monday, August 11, 2008

The Week That Was



So much happened this week. Blog readers Owen and Molly got married, though not to each other, but to people (Char & Shaw) who may or may not spend much time on the blog. Anyway, congratulations to all of them.

Also, John Edwards told everyone he's a narcissist and an egocentrist, and that's why he hooked it up with Jay McInerney's ex-girlfriend. Of course, my endorsement of Edwards for President means I am obligated to comment, so let me say this: I still don't give a shit about character. If you believe that John Edwards was a snake-oil salesman who used poverty alleviation for his platform only for political points, 1) you're wrong (since he didn't come close to winning because, you know, poor people don't have an office on K Street) and 2) you probably feel vindicated because he cheated on his wife and lied about it, so that makes him a fake, like you always knew he was. This is America, and that's your right. And if you think John Edwards is smarmy and Elizabeth is great, then you really, really hate him now. Fair enough -- even though it looks like Elizabeth encouraged him to run after he told her about the affair, so maybe we shouldn't ascribe all the naked and fool-hardy ambition to him alone.

But if like me, you think there is absolutely no connection between a politician's marital infidelity (and desperate and moronic attempts at covering up said infidelity) and his worth as a potential statesman, then you don't really come out of this whole mess with a new outlook on things: John and Elizabeth Edwards forced Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to talk about poverty and pushed the debate on universal health care in the primaries, thus paving the way for those issues to be prominent in a fantastical Obama Administration. It's that straightforward. Now even If he wanted to divorce Elizabeth and shack up with his mistress that makes him a bad husband and a bad father, but it doesn't change his politics. It didn't for Nicholas Sarkozy, and it didn''t for John McCain, who left his hobbled, ballooning wife, the mother of his children, for a blonde cheerleader, who thinks c**t is a term of endearment, and provides him with a lifetime supply of Bud Light Lime and money.

...But, while I credit Edwards for being needlessly self-punishing in his admission (what other politician owns up to narcissism?) and for sparing Elizabeth the Silda Spitzer sideshow treatment, I do have one hang-up about the affair: I don't care about the sex -- I care about the money. Rielle Hunter was paid six figures to make short documentaries about Edwards, and by at least one account, her hiring occurred after the start of their affair. Now, Hunter is what we would term a failed actress, with little experience in documentary film-making, and, apparently, her salary was paid out of the One America Foundation. That is, it would seem John Edwards used my contribution to pay his Yanni-worshipping girlfriend to hang out with him on the campaign trail. If this is in fact the case, then you -- Heidi, E., anonymousalex et. al -- were right, and John Edwards can go fuck himself.

I'm voting for Heath Ledger.

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Duke 89, Carolina 78



So, John Edwards is back on the scene (a little Where's Waldo?, but see above). But since he got his ass handed to him again, he'll probably go back underground. Unlike last time though, I'm not exactly torn up about his most recent loss because the team I support is vastly superior to the team he supports! Also, check out Gerald Henderson's sick block on Hansbrough. This time it was all ball and no nose. Go team! Sports are very good! Indeed!

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

The End Is Nigh

On Tuesday, a man who spent $30 million to win the Florida Republican Primary finished in third place with less than 282,000 votes. On the same day, another man, who had been precluded from spending even dollar one to win the Florida Democratic Primary, also finished in third place with less than 249,000 votes. Yesterday, both Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards gave in to the reality of their lots in life--and we, in turn, give in to ours.

As this blog has made clear, I regard the former Mayor as depraved and deranged, a man who would make it his mission in life to execute Muslims around the world, a man who would call this excess of American might, largesse of the American spirit. Sometimes, even this fat, dumb country has a way of surprising me: it took a hard, long look at Mayor McCarpetBomb and realized it didn't like the dithering, slithering mess that it saw. It realized that the highest office in the land--though occupied by a myopic brush-herder--deserves more than a man who stood near the embers of his own astonishingly misplaced Emergency Command Center and took credit for...for what exactly, I'm not sure.

I am a bitter and vindictive person, I know; I am given to ad hominem attacks, but Rudy Giuliani is a horrible person, a union buster, a terror-bater, a Machiavellian gifted at decorating his own legend, and I can only pray that his failed campaign will ruin him professionally and erase him from our national consciousness. My saying this may seem impolitic--perhaps I am trampling on the already down-trodden--but if we are really to move beyond September 11th and heal, we must lay to rest all the myths that surround the narrative of that day: Rudy Giuliani did not stop the attacks , he did not guide us to some new understanding in their wake, he did not show resolve in the face of hardship. He was a man who saw oppportunity in disaster, and for that he deserves to be punished. The end of his campaign should be only the first penance.

If we are to gain anything from the day that made Rudy Giuliani, I hope it is this: tragedy should humble us, sober us, lead us to self-reflection. It did not in the immediate aftermath of the attacks; it has not in the protracted aftermath of the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. But when the vilest, rankest of our electorate can look at Rudy Giuliani and see a false prophet, I am heartened. Perhaps, we are not as dumb as I thought.

As for John Edwards, his departure portends different things for our country. Others may despise him for his haircut idiocy, for building his wife an expensive home, for working for those who are blazing a path straight to hell. But I look at him and I see this: a vain man, surely, a flawed one; he profited by helping others profit from their misfortunes; he arrived in Washington a centrist, and then he ran for President, and everything changed. The current administration, its disavowal of its people, its disdain for accountability, shocked this man--this nouveau riche son of a mill worker--into caring, and I--in a way I have not in years--cared about his candidacy.

Edwards rose from freshman obscurity to deliver what I regard--yes, even in the age of Obama--the most stirring stump speech Iowa has ever heard. (Sorry, apparently, there is no youtube of it.) He paraded on the floats of hope. He pandered to the establishment and became his party's vice-presidential nominee. He drank from the grail of establishment politics and became sick to his stomach: John Kerry, insouciant to the last, refused to excoriate the masters of swift-boat politics; he refused to get angry, when in 2004 anger was all that we had left. Edwards got sick to his stomach, indeed, but more important, finally, he got sick of himself: he repudiated his time in the Senate, and he became a left-wing populist.

He crafted an entire campaign about the least politically powerful people in this country, and he brought class issues once again to the fore. For Russ Feingold, for some readers of this blog, the Edwards of today cannot be reconciled with the Edwards of 2004, but as far as I'm concerned, I cannot imagine how a man goes to Washington in 1998, filled with giddy-eyed hope and backwoods moderate ideas, and doesn't come out as enraged as Edwards has. Frankly, it's the narrative of my own political evolution.

As Rudy Giuliani's political demise puts to rest some of the myths of September 11th, John Edwards' signals that there is room in the graveyard for other myths still: specifically, that party politics are about the people and not the party itself. As the warring cults of personality that are the Obama and Clinton camps come into sharper focus, we know now--and we know without a doubt--the poor in this country have no purchase on our political spirit. And the Democratic Party will never again nominate a populist.

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

ethics or butter?

so...i have a lot of things on my mind now, one of which is how actually sad the whole jamie lynn pregnancy debacle is. was she just doomed, considering the main influences in her life? will her mysterious/premarital sex having/churchgoing/age undetermined boyfriend be charged with statutory rape? most importantly, is there any hope at all for ali lohan?

i've complained from time to time about how bored i've been of late by indie rock. perhaps this is a combination of my own laziness, which has pretty much stopped my pursuit of new music, and the fact that a lot of bands who showed promise seemed to putter out. anyway, i gave a listen to many of the songs on the pitchfork 100 list [insert c4ts' disapproval here], in an uncharacteristic show of...i guess initiative? well, not really - after all, i'm listening to music culled and compiled by a bunch of smug know-it-alls. i'm just a lemming. harvey lemming.

anyway, listening to these gave me some hope, although a fun single doth not a great album make. and c4ts, i wrote this in my comment to your post of jens lekman, but the one single pitchfork chose for this list actually made me angry. i had to stop listening. i find him to be insufferable.

oh yes, i meant to ramble on some about the korean election. i'm a bit torn about this guy. i like his hardscrabble background, the fact that he showed signs of an anti-authoritarian bent from an early age by protesting the government's desire to improve diplomatic relations with japan. not to mention, i always questioned the efficacy of this so-called "sunshine policy". sure, it yielded the lone nobel laureate in korean history (i believe), but kim jong-il be crazy, dude. he's starving his own citizens. call me cynical, but he's not going to capitulate bc you offer some niceties.

anyway, i've not yet spoken with my parents about this, but i think my dad's stance is that "well, lee's the lesser of the evils". but is he? what about this corruption charge? do the koreans really want a president rendered impotent by an indictment?

this lee guy seems very result-oriented, sometimes bending the rules to suit his needs and goals. i'm not sure if i can be fully on board with that. i understand you have to grease some palms to make things happen, but haven't we had enough corruption in korea?

btw c4ts, my friend at work today pointed out exactly why i feel uncomfortable with haircut 400 (even beyond this very perturbing rumor of an extramarital affair. lord, please tell me this man wasn't cheating on his CANCER-STRICKEN WIFE). i admire his message and i think his whole "son of a millworker" thing isn't a shtick. it's damn hard to be in the running for president when you're the son of a millworker. but you know, john edwards just seems to really enjoy his money and flaunt it: his ginormous house, his extravagant haircuts, his general opulence. his actions and his message are completely misaligned and, yeah, i know, i can't vote, but i can't trust this dude either.

Saturday, June 16, 2007

My Open Letter to Obamamaniacs



So, John Edwards hovers in third place (fourth, if you count Gore), my friends make fun of my steadfast support of him, and the homophobic, feminizing pretty-boy-with-an-expensive-haircut storyline continues to interest the press and the electorate more than the fact that he's a for-real anti-war candidate, despises Bush's tax cuts, wants meaningful universal health-care, has some interest in alleviating poverty, and has pissed off the Democratic establishment for, I suppose, being an individual. Now, I'm no fool--or I might be, but not for the reasons you think. I understand how amazing it is that the Democratic front-runners are a woman and a person of color respectively. And given the viability of their campaigns and the merits of their candidacies, what possible justification is there for voting in another rich, white guy? I get it.

But with Obama's campaign--not some Swiftboaters front group, mind you, but his motherfucking campaign-- peddling in this kind of shit, I ask you, how is someone like me--a South Asian of Punjabi heritage--how is he to bring himself to cast a vote for Obama? Now, or ever.

Well, you might say that's politics in post-Rovian America. But the next time you feel like annointing this guy the messiah, shut your face. The Obama who made his name channeling John Kennedy at the 2004 convention (see above) is dead. Congratulations on what's left in his place.

Saturday, May 19, 2007

May Polls

I'm not putting forth my best effort this Sweeps season, it would appear. School ended and I found myself separated from my computer, and a curious thing happened: I realized all the blogging, anonymous tipstering to gossip sites, watching of 30 Rock I was doing between JSTOR and Lexis research was sustainable so long as there was some sort of other task to avoid. If I sat at my computer for seven hours, working on a paper, I could steal away to the blog or to my favorite bit-terrorist site now and again, and all would be right with the world. Now, as I wait for bar prep classes to start on Wednesday--with no reason even to turn on my laptop--I find myself going whole days without checking email. I've been reading and riding my bike around a newly resplendent A2. I went to the Arboretum and got lost. I ate at Zingerman's twice this week. I guess the old Powerbook and I just needed some time apart, and I needed to remember what people did with themselves pre-mid-1990's...Now onto the post:

Everyone has noticed how the presidential election season seems to have started earlier this time around than in years past. It's like your local mall festooning the rafters with faux snow and over-sized, plastic candy canes in October. In the last few weeks in fact, there've been three debates--one Democratic, two Republican (torturepalooza?)--and we're still, what, almost seven months from the Iowa Caucuses. There is an obvious point to be made here: in that span of time McCain's face might disintegrate or American politics' George Foreman, Al Gore, might jump in the ring--that is, anything can happen--so why all the attention being lavished on the front-runners? At this time in 2004 (in fact, even deeper into the season) Howard Dean was the Democratic front-runner and Wesley Clark was getting a whole lot of buzz; In 1992 Paul Tsongas was steam-rolling his way to the nomination. In 2004, Kerry pulled out a miraculous victory in Iowa and Dean found himself in a very special Brady Bunch episode; in '92, Iowa was irrelevant (because native son Tom Harkin won it with 76% of the vote) and Tsongas pulled out New Hampshire, but Bill Clinton schooled him down the road.

All I'm saying is this race isn't Hillary v. Obama/Bobblehead v. McMeltyface. After his robust showing there in 2004, John Edwards is winning nearly every single poll conducted in Iowa over the last few months, and has South Carolina locked down. He knows how the primaries work. Who cares about the national polls that put him in third? Romney's got a machine in place in New Hampshire, and New England pride being what it is, is winning nearly every recent poll in the granite state. Who cares if nationally he's polling behind Jowly McDistrictattorney? In the absence of any incumbents, there's no such thing as a front-runner eighteen months before the election, and if you think this election's going to be Hilary vs. some cross-dressing abortionist cousin-defiler, you may be right, but you're flying in the face of the last twenty years of American presidential electioneering-- speaking of which, check out Bill Richardson: