28 October 2007
23 October 2007
Peanuts, parrots, and brownies
Since 9/11, much has been made of the heroism of the "first responders" - police, fire, EMTs. Without a doubt, they deserve our utmost respect and appreciation. However, I'd like to bring attention to the "first responder" of the animal kingdom, Peanut the Parrot:
Shannon Conwell, 33, said he and his 9-year-old son fell asleep on the couch while watching a movie. They awoke about 3 a.m. Friday, Oct. 19th to find their home on fire after hearing the family's Amazon parrot, Peanut, imitating a fire alarm.
"He was really screaming his head off,'' Conwell said.
The smoke alarm had activated, but it was the bird's call that caught Conwell's attention.
This story reminds us that, in this post 9/11 age, we need to think outside of the box in terms of our personal security. Much as the government has created the Department of Homeland Security, we should all create our own Departments of Household Security. In fact, I was able to hire former FEMA director Michael "Heckuva Job" Brown to lead mine! I have also hired a staff of five parrots to work closely with Brownie on creating a repeater system for the one fire alarm I do have. Brownie convinced me this made more sense than getting more fire alarms, because, to quote him, "Parrots are the smartest people there are, and they can smell fire a mile away." Anyway, he's great, and I've never felt safer.
Labels: brownie, disaster in chief, escape
¶ 8:55 AM 0 comments
12 October 2007
On Russert and soft support, and Gore as the New Sputnik
It took this quote from NBC political hack Tim Russert to wake me up (blog-wise):
Huge percentages of potential voters remain totally undecided, even in the early primary states. And among those that have already "made up" their minds, on average OVER HALF are open to supporting another candidate. How can one conclude from that that the "Democratic base is very happy with their field of candidates"?
Yes, media men like Russert might be pulling for a Hillary candidacy. It would, after all, make their jobs far easier. They could simply pull out their notes from the late 1990s and happily regurgitate the same old "Clintons vs. the Angry Right" and "where is Monica" storylines. Russert might relish the opportunity to ponder, "Would Monica be given a cabinet position a hypothetical Clinton administration, given her extensive internship experience?" "David Broder, tell us the answer, as your words are fact and all else fiction."
Therefore, Russert chants to the Democratic base, "You are HAPPY with your candidates. So Happy. Don't worry: Be Happy, Democrats. Stay stuck in your media-centric world of hype."
Tim's statement, of course, was presented as part of his overall argument that Al Gore will not run. In Tim's uber-simplified world, satiation equals inaction, and he wants to slow our collective political metabolism to the point that Al Gore sees no need. After all, an Al Gore candidacy would be a disaster for Tim: it would likely bypass the traditional media, and it would focus on actual problems and solutions (how novel!) and not Monicagate Redux. Ratings would plummet.
I hope Al Gore stands up, shimmering with his various golden awards, hot, bothered, and ready to fight. I hope he jumps in. His entrance would not add to existing race; it would reformulate it entirely, recycling its contents into a entirely new, and ever-so-necessary dialogue on the future of the planet.
An Al Gore Campaign, and the ensuing Al Gore Presidency, would be a paradigm shifter. Moving from the Politics of Negative Definition (the scorched earth, destroy your opponent and avoid the issues paradigm), we would enter a post-political Age of Positive Action. The United States, and thus the planet, would never be the same.
Fifty years ago, when the USSR sent Sputnik up and thus launched the Space Age, the global perception of mankind's role in the universe was forever altered. I propose that an Al Gore presidency would be such an occasion, another, much-needed, point of no return.
For that I say: Run, Al, Run.
But right now the Democratic primary base is very happy with their field of candidates.Tim, you are an idiot. How do you get off making that statement? It is an outrage that your network presents you as some sort of political-know-it-all when clearly you are anything but. Anyone, even the most ardent Hillary supporter, would admit that support at this point in the Democratic primaries is very soft (see this extensive explanation for more).
Huge percentages of potential voters remain totally undecided, even in the early primary states. And among those that have already "made up" their minds, on average OVER HALF are open to supporting another candidate. How can one conclude from that that the "Democratic base is very happy with their field of candidates"?
Yes, media men like Russert might be pulling for a Hillary candidacy. It would, after all, make their jobs far easier. They could simply pull out their notes from the late 1990s and happily regurgitate the same old "Clintons vs. the Angry Right" and "where is Monica" storylines. Russert might relish the opportunity to ponder, "Would Monica be given a cabinet position a hypothetical Clinton administration, given her extensive internship experience?" "David Broder, tell us the answer, as your words are fact and all else fiction."
Therefore, Russert chants to the Democratic base, "You are HAPPY with your candidates. So Happy. Don't worry: Be Happy, Democrats. Stay stuck in your media-centric world of hype."
Tim's statement, of course, was presented as part of his overall argument that Al Gore will not run. In Tim's uber-simplified world, satiation equals inaction, and he wants to slow our collective political metabolism to the point that Al Gore sees no need. After all, an Al Gore candidacy would be a disaster for Tim: it would likely bypass the traditional media, and it would focus on actual problems and solutions (how novel!) and not Monicagate Redux. Ratings would plummet.
I hope Al Gore stands up, shimmering with his various golden awards, hot, bothered, and ready to fight. I hope he jumps in. His entrance would not add to existing race; it would reformulate it entirely, recycling its contents into a entirely new, and ever-so-necessary dialogue on the future of the planet.
An Al Gore Campaign, and the ensuing Al Gore Presidency, would be a paradigm shifter. Moving from the Politics of Negative Definition (the scorched earth, destroy your opponent and avoid the issues paradigm), we would enter a post-political Age of Positive Action. The United States, and thus the planet, would never be the same.
Fifty years ago, when the USSR sent Sputnik up and thus launched the Space Age, the global perception of mankind's role in the universe was forever altered. I propose that an Al Gore presidency would be such an occasion, another, much-needed, point of no return.
For that I say: Run, Al, Run.
Labels: al gore, russert, sputnik
¶ 1:16 PM 1 comments
