Music Massacre

I was at the Gym today and subjected to Channel V. In one of their countdowns, they played a song that ripped off the Phil Collin's "Another Day in Paradise" melody - I think it was called "too fast" or something like that. Now, this sort of thing really makes me mad. They managed to take a meaningful song with social commentary and reduce it to yet another carbon-copy black dude blathering on whilst surrounded by wailing ho's. I mean - seriously, thats what most pop music seems to be today. As far as I'm concerned , the R&B Genre is pathetic. Most female artists can be cut-and-pasted between songs, with no change to it. The male artists are little better. And the music & lyrics are so shallow: the subject is money/ho's/how much of a player I am/how much of an ice queen I am.

Give me some sweet, sweet Live any time time.

Victorian Election

In the election of the Bland vs. the Blander, Bracks has claimed a historic 3rd term victory tonight. Both major parties suffered a swing against them, with Family First picking up most of the proceeds.

Most "pundits" where expecting such a result, so no real surprises. However, I believe that the NSW election will be much more tight, given the many of scandals Iemma has faced. In comparison, Steve Bracks has (at least from this distance) seem to have run on a relatively even keel.

From a federal perspective, I think that this result re-enforces just how powerful encumbency is in the modern Australian Electoral system.

Good Quote

As the death toll in Iraq escalates....

Hawkeye: War isn't Hell. War is war, and Hell is Hell. And of the two, war is a lot worse.

Father Mulcahy: How do you figure, Hawkeye?

Hawkeye: Easy, Father. Tell me, who goes to Hell?

Father Mulcahy: Sinners, I believe.

Hawkeye: Exactly. There are no innocent bystanders in Hell. War is chalk full of them - little kids, cripples, old ladies. In fact, except for some of the brass, almost everybody involved is an innocent bystander.

Can Beazly hang on?

The knives are sliding out of their sheaths for Beazly again. Mind you, much of this is stirred up by New Ltd. journalists, who seem to take perverse delight in exacerbating Labor's pains. After last weeks gaffe, sending condolences to Karl Rove instead of Rove McManus, the papers would have you believe that there is a groundswell against Beazly, with Rudd the likely replacement. Personally, I don't think the party or the public really wants a change there. Its a long time until the next election, and once people begin to look at wider issues (as they focus closer to the election), I still think Labor is in with a fighting chance. I hope. Because the current Government has no plans to build the future of this country (education and infrastructure), and would rather see current company profits protected, than protecting the air for future generation.

Broken Laptop

Sorry for the absense, but my Laptop has slightly died, and is in for repairs with Acer. Fortunately, it died 5 days before the warranty expired, and it looks like its getting a brank spanking new Inte 915PM motherboard.

By the way, if you have he chance, Bono was interviewed on Lateline (www.abc.net.au/lateline). He is so very well spoken, and across all local issues when he speaks - he is actually both a rockstar and a fully fledged politician.

In the mean time, Beazly has fouled up again, giving condolences to Karl Rove instead of Rove McManus (although condolences to Karl Rove may be in order, as his Neo-Con fantasy shatters around him). Beazly really needs to sort himself out, otherwise he may throw away the next election.

Howard/Costello still have no believable or tenably position on Climate change, arguing on the one hand that India and China are undergoing industrialisation and therefore need to be cut some slack in terms of emissions (in the same way that Europes industrialisation was powered by dirty technology). However, they arguing even more strongly that no climate agreement will work without them being onboard - indeed, Australia will be unfairly disadvantaged if they are excluded (hence why we don't sign Kyoto). Sounds to me like a bob each way, with the aim to do nothing.

The times they are a changin'

So - its done and dusted. The Democrats have both houses of Congress. I was listening to a U.S. Political analyst this morning, who made some interesting points about the current Washington landscape. In the U.S. (unlike Australia), political parties are more loosely aligned, and do not have the lock-step discipline associated with our political system. However, over the last 6 years, Karl Rove (advisor to Bush) has taken the Republicans from a centre-right alliance to a disciplined right-wing party. Concurrently, the Democrats have retained the traditional center-left alliance (admitted, "left" in the US is very different from what we would consider to be "left"). What this means is that whilst the Republicans could present a stronger, more organised and united front (which probably helped them in the last two elections), they have also narrowed their constituency. When things go bad, and people begin to look for alternatives, the Democrats have better been able to tailor their messages for individual electorates and can thus appeal to a wider group. For example, they fielded religious conservatives in the South and Mid-West, whilst keeping liberals in the northern and eastern states.

The upshot of this, however, is that they have no strong coherent policy on Iraq. This may yet undo their winnings, as with control of both houses, there will be much more responsibility for decisions put upon them. This election was more a backlash against the Republicans, not just on Iraq, but scandals and corruption may have also kept some supporters at home (voting, of course, is not compulsory). It remains to be seen if this win will significant change the outcome of Iraq. I don't believe it will, because they really have no wriggle-room in the foreign policy mess created by Bush and his brains.

What will also be interesting, is if this Democratic win has used up all the anti-Bush/anti-Republican sentiment, thus actually making it more difficult to win the next Presidential election. Having said that, if the scuttlebut is to be believed, its shaping up to be a contest between Sen. Caine (Republican) and Sen. Clinton (Democrat). Whistl I think a Clinton win would be better, and have a sense of poetry (Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton), I have much respect for Caine, as he argued strongly against the execution of the war, and the use of torture. Either way, I think the U.S and the world will be in much better hands.

An interesting article

Found this article on the SMH written by Kevin Rudd. It looks at the relationship between faith (specifically, Christianity) and how it translates to the curernt political paradigm.

Also - back to the US: Montana has been taken by the Democrats giving them 50% of the Senate. Virginia is all that stands between them and a house majority, and the Democrats are apparently a hairs-breadth in front. Prepare for a legion of Lawyers to decend shortly, to pick through the rich spoils of this particular battle.

America begins to wake up to itself

In what can only be described as a landslide victory, the U.S. Democrats have regained control of Congress after 12 years. In Republican strongholds across that country, voters turned out to give George a good solid kick in the pants, and vote in a Democrat. Their Senate (on which Republicans have a much stronger grip), is hanging on a knifes edge - with two seats to decided the outcome.

This will not only make it very difficult for Republicans to win the next Presidential election, but Bush's next two years have been widely described as going to be that of a "lame duck". All of a sudden, accountability returns to the system, as Democrats can subpoena documents and reveal the truth about this regime's activities.

I see the Democrat's victories as a win for America. Firstly, it will force a change in their approach to Iraq (and foreign policy). Secondly, it gives me hope that the next president will be capable of stringing together a sentance (unassisted), and have an IQ greater than that of a bowl of mashed potato.

Interestingly, if the next president is a Democrat, and (god forbid) Howard wins the next election - this will certainly leave him out in the cold! The long arm of the American Republican party will be removed from his derriere, and all of a sudden, he might actually have to develop some foreign policy for Australia. Now, wouldn't that be a novelty!

Happy Birthday

50 years of ABC TV! May God bless (and keep the politician's grubby mits off) them!

Climate Change

Up until this week, the Government's official position has been that they are "sceptics" of the link between greenhouse gasses and climate change. (As with Iraq), they ignored the real evidence given by experts, and decided they would do nothing. Suddenly, the Stern report comes out, putting climate change in the the context of the economy - calling it the biggest Market failure ever - and all of a sudden, the message seems to have finally gotten through. THe Coalition still have no concrete policy, but are doing their level best to throw something together, in what has become possible the most rapid U-turn in Australian politics. Still, it makes me angry to think that they can sit there and pretend nothing is wrong, becaue they don't want to deal with it. Put it in terms of dollars, and suddenly, they are interested.

Their argument for not signing Kyoto is hollow - "we won't do it unless everyone else does it". This is a classic example of Howard relegating Australia from being an International leader (as it was under Hawke and Keating), to an International (read U.S) follower. Its a denigration of the standing of this nation.

To John Howard, and his other pasty-white ministers - I hope you all die from skin cancer.