Wow

Wow.

lhp

Never Count A Clinton Out

I do not know her exact measurements, but Senator Clinton looks like a short woman. One of my father's favorite sayings is that 'there is no shortie that aint a mean, fighting son-of-a-bitch.' Senator Clinton is that shortie.

Many are counting Hillary out. They say her last statement at the Texas debate was a swan song, a graceful farewell. Bill Clinton has gone as far as telling crowds Hillary must win Ohio and Texas, otherwise she will lose. LOSE, MUST WIN, OVER, those are all very powerful, and rarely used words in American politics. Confidence, even arrogance, is the attitude politicians adopt like Jolie a Vietnamese baby. In politics, the saying goes, you need a big head and broad shoulders.

This applies to all candidates this year. Obama borders on cockiness, which many, including myself, find refreshing and invigorating. But what about Clinton? A Clinton does not put forget a Clinton legacy. They are one of the most powerful families in American history. Hillary is not far off in terms of delegates, support, or even fundraising. Sure, polls show her trailing nationally, in hypothetical match-ups against McCain, and her two 'givens', Texas and Ohio, are now a dead-heat and a slimming edge in the polls, respectively. But remember, she is still a Clinton. She is HILLARY Clinton. An icon, both famous and infamous, and a political figure that often shadows two presidents, one past and one current.

So why this change in mood, no pun intended. One word: Smarts. Oh, and another word: Manipulation. She is once again carving out a pity hole and waving a pink flag, neither conceding nor foaming at the mouth. She is simply reminding us she is human, and an emotional, poor little human, at that. Yes, she is trying to make us feel sorry for her. This would be called 'ridiculous' anytime, except for the victorious precedent it has. It worked after Iowa, it helped her before Super Tuesday, and now, in a fight that looks like one she never prepared for, she is going back to it again.

Crying before New Hampshire helped her win the state by rallying the "You GO Girl" vote. Getting weapy before Super Tuesday gave her big state wins. Now this time, it is a double whammy. Bill issues the ultimatums, while she plays the martyr. St. Hillary, patron saint to whiners and the capricious.

Will it work? So far, it does not show that it has. The polls still show a dead heat in Texas, and Ohio is now a single digit difference state. After Obama's 11 straight wins, I presume his momentum might have given him a slim lead in both states. Maybe this two-pronged act has slowed down the hemorrhage. Maybe this strategy all along has slowed down the hemorrhage.

Watching Hillary go against Obama in the last debate before the March 4th primaries, fending off her fate and Tim Russert, reminds me of a battered, veteran heavyweight trying to slow down the wily, cocky upstart. Sonny Liston v. Cassius Clay. She knows she is in her last few rounds. She is not focusing on skill, but on throwing upper cuts and hugging-down Obama, trying to go for the knockout, or at least tire him out. Will she land one in the end and upset the audience now chanting 'Obama! Obama!'. Around this time next week, I will be talking about a knockout or a split decision.

Michael Buffer...will you do the honors.

lhp

Mexican Music. True. True

Pablo Francisco.

lhp

Myanmar Feels the Pressure From India

The newest development in Myanmar's 'move' back to democracy comes from India, Myanmar's neighbor.  

According to Bloomberg, leaders in India are pressuring the National League of Democracy, Myanmar's ruling party/junta, to consider a revision in their constitution through a referendum in the near future.

How likely is this? Depends.  Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the opposition, thinks it is too early for an election to change national leadership. The sad truth is that even an election were to come, the guidelines that were drafted during a secretive convention between the junta leaders bar Aung San from even running.

Even if a democracy were to come back to this country filled to the rim with turmoil, it will be the equivalent to a platypus democracy: looks like a duck, walks like a duck, but it aint.  If Aung San, the most popular opposition figure (maybe even the most popular leader in the country) cannot run because she cannot even leave her house, how much of a democracy is that?

lhp

Mos Def, Cornell West, and Bill Maher: Not fair for Mos

I am a fan of Mos Def's work.  Today, I am just that.  This segment from Bill Maher's HBO show is quite revealing, not only of Mos Def's comedic timing, but of his evanescent ignorance and intelligence.  However, when he sounds ignorant, he rivals Rush and Buchanan.

Mos Def is trying to emulate Cornell West's constant brilliance by using often used and tired leftists arguments that make liberals look loony.

lhp

The Little Things: Coffee

If you ever get the chance of meeting me/talking to me/bumping into me/or looking in my general direction before I get a cup of coffee in the morning, all I say to you is: Run and call the cops!!! I morning person I am not, so no use in hiding it. However, the idea of being awake IN the morning is a good thing apparently, according to my boss or the California Highway Patrol. Bah. I oblige by injecting caffeine in my veins on a daily basis. You can see the track marks on my Starbucks gift card.

This little thing has such a long history that I need more coffee just to have energy to write about it. But I already had my cup in the morning, so I wont go at it to that extent. Coffee beans have been the cause for turmoil, rising and falling of nations/economies, and cultural change the like only a few things other entities can claim (Jesus, is one of those who can claim it, too). Most Central American countries live off the bean, and China is now being seduced by the sipping delight over tea. Colombia is known for java as much as it is for coca, and Starbucks is now as American as Uncle Sam and Led Zeppelin. Coffee is everywhere.

(Side note: In a battle of Americana supremacy, McDonald's is now challenging Starbucks on their turf, bringing premium coffee to their menus, right next to the Quarter Pounder AND the Quarter Pounder With Cheese).

A thing I find so intriguing about this little thing is how much of a message it carries with its use. An example that comes to mind is what the tradition of drinking coffee says about a country. Americans love to drink their coffee now that it is so customizable. Grande Mocha Soy Half-Caff Latte with a double shot of vanilla. Um, yeah. I have heard longer orders, but I didn't have a notepad with me at the time. There is also the enfatuation with Grande this and Venti that, when the sizes of our coffees are only so much bigger than in other countries, including old-school coffee sipping countries. And of course, the fact that you drank a cup of coffee in the morning is no reason to not drink another 3 hrs later, and then another, and another. What does this say about America? Hey-zeus, man, a whole lot. It is so interesting how much of our sense of individualism, love of uniqueness, proclivity toward excess, and pride in overworking ourselves, goes into our coffee lifestyle.

Mexico is another example. Ask any Chicano who knows a little bit about their heritage, or any Mexican who lived in Mexico for some time, and they will let you know what Cafe con Leche is.

Couldn't find any chicanos or mexico natives? Ok, fine, I will tell you: It means Coffee with Milk. But not just a little bit of coffee with milk. It should be more like Milk with Coffee: you add about an inch or two of coffe into your cup, and the rest is filled with milk. A ratio of 1:4 or so. The coffee is always had in a ceramic cup or mug of some sort. Only recently has the coffee on the go way set in, thanks in part to Starbucks growing in popularity over there. But usually coffee is served in small ceramic mugs, with way more milk than coffee, and only had at breakfast. So what? This can also be seen as a microcosm of Mexican culture:

-The coffee is diluted with milk, making it more of a pleasurable drink, rather than a utilitarian one that is meant to wake you up and get you going. It is actually a PART of the meal. --The easy-going attitude in Mexico.

-Mexicans use ceramic mugs rather than to-go coffee mugs, or buying their coffee in a fast-food fashion. They stay where they buy it, drink it, and then leave. --The more leisurely pace of the Mexican lifestyle.

-Coffee in Mexico is essentially reserved for breakfast, and is hardly ever had after. --Instead of focusing on constantly being on caffeinated and alert, Mexicans focus on getting a good start on the day and making the best they can out of it. The rural tradition to close up shop at an un-American hour (earlier than 4pm) is another example of this. The day was a productive one, now it is to relax and ENJOY it.

You can easily dismiss all these extrapulations as overreaching, or infering too much out of so little. But little things like this often fall in line with the greater cultural context it is a part of.

I am tired. I need more coffee. Git outta my way....

lhp

Matthew McConaug-HEY! Needs A Career Intervention

Peter Travers, the movie critic from Rolling Stone magazine, has taken the time, god bless him, to give Mr. McConaughey some advice: Quit being lazy!!!

The Texan with drawl that goes on for miles, and the pecs that are made of wood, is suffering what may be called Post-Bare Chested Lethargia. Ever since he has chosen to make the top half of himself be exposed bare in almost every movie, McConaughey has failed to show us he is actually using the very, very top of himself, his head. Picking lazy project after lazy project (The Wedding Planner, How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days, Fool's Gold), the sorta-gifted actor is making money off his boobs more than anything else. Let's call him Tomela Anderson from here on out.

Matthew, buddy, get back to work and pick your movies a bit more wisely. Just because you are allowed to be in a movie half-naked, acting as if stoned, and arguing with Kate Hudson through 3/4 of your movies, doesn't mean you should.

lhp

Red Campaign in the Red?

The NY Times reports that Project Red, or Red Campaign, which is dedicated to raising money to fight AIDS in Africa, is not doing so well.

According to their research, Red is actually spending much more in marketing than it is actually raising for the fund. Bono, the lead singer of U2, and one of the most active and outspoken supporters of the campaign, mentioned as early as last year that they had raised close to $50 million for the fund. Not so, apparently:

"In its March 2007 issue, Advertising Age magazine reported that Red companies had collectively spent as much as $100 million in advertising and raised only $18 million. Officials of the campaign said then that the companies had spent $50 million on advertising and that the amount raised was $25 million. Advertising Age stood by its article."

-nytimes.com

A sad truth: image outspends charity.

lhp

Marriage, Downhill From the Start

A new study we can easily add to the "You spent money to figure THAT out" column, 'revealed' today that marriage is doomed from the get-go. Spouses will only see their partners in starker, and more negative terms as the years pile on.

Duh.

I watched "American Beauty" for the first since the first time I saw it about 6 years back. Talk about perfect timing for cynics. The movie, in case you haven't seen it, is essentially a slap in the face to suburbia, yuppies, the American family, and our 'sedation', as the movie calls it, that takes over us once we grow up. There is really no reason to be pissed off, depressed, frustrated, or sexually lethargic, but we are. At least, we BECOME that once we start being successful. Please add your own sarcasm to that last word.

I do not want to spoil anything, for it is a very good movie that may hit home more than you would like, but here is the point in relation to this groundbreaking finding: Commitments kill joy. Not all commitments, especially not the commitments that enrich us and give us responsabilities to help us grow, yada yada, but unnecessary commitments, or, to put it more bluntly, commitments society tells us we should commit to.

Take, for example, the commitment of marriage. What changes when you are in love with someone and want to be with them for the rest of your life? Do you keep doing what you have and, indeed, live the rest of your life with that person, relying on nothing more than your affection for each other and how you enrich each other's lives? Of course not, because that is not what society says you should do. You gotsta get married. That makes things legit. It also makes things forced. No longer are you with that person because you cannot live without them and cherish their flaws and attributes, no, now you are with them because you HAVE to be with them. You signed the papers that said "I am not with you, and you are now with me. We will be the same people as before, but now we are letting the rest of society know that I am with you and you are with me, even though they already knew this. Really, this paper is just a contract that if broken will punish us. Oh yeah, but I love YOU xoxoxoxo."

When we commit, strange things happen: cheating, lack of communication, frustration with each other, nitpicking, insufficiency, etc. I am not sure why that happens, but it may stem from feeling in an artificial place. A commitment pressured by society does not feel natural, even for us who created society and lived in it for quite some time. You would think this would be 'natural' to us by now. But I feel it isn't. Playing the part we are supposed to play may make us rebel. It is as if we are playing Patrick Dempsey sidekick in an 80's teen comedy, when we really wanted to be in Dempsey's shoes picking up the girl, or maybe the bad boy trying to take the girl away from Dempsey, or maybe even the principal who bugs Dempsey day-in day-out....ANYONE but the dorky sidekick!

Living by your own accord is slowly killed as you commit through societal pressures and contracts, and thereby the joy dies also. This is very different from kids, family, or friends. You choose (to a certain degree) to have kids and keep your friends. Your mother, father, siblings, and extended family come NATURALLY to you. They were not forced down your throat by anyone, but are as much of you as you are of them. The same goes with children, also.

There is a good amount of joy in that.

What about other non-natural, non-binding commitments, like a job? Same thing, but with some caveats. You need money to live, and usually a job can get that for you--usually meaning you make enough money to buy something from the company you work for. I am sure I will not be alone, however, when I say that a job also kills joy. No brainer there. It sort of commits you to it, seeing that you need money to live and buy stuff you 'need', so it kills you that you are working somewhere you don't want to be. This point is also bruisingly explored in "American Beauty."

What then of marriage and the hill you roll down on after you take the plunge? Well, a big, fat "I told you so" wont cure anything. I can only suggest that you choose wisely, because unlike a job, you cannot give a two-notice, or unlike a friend, you cannot stop returning their calls. They will be there, day and night, good and bad, happy or sad, and they will not leave quietly. And if they do, well, damn, I bet she was cheating on you.

lhp

Romney Is Done!

The AP reports that Mitt Romney, Former Gov. of Massachussets, will suspend his campaign, and effectively give the nomination to John McCain.

Now, it is up to Huckabee to cozy up to McCain for a VP spot. A McCain-Romney ticket is too crazy to work--too much hate. The only other option would be take up the only other Republican with some well-known conservative credentials: Fred "Lazy Fox" Thompson.

Dun Dun.

Either that or go with America's Mayor.

lhp

Obama Raises Over 7m in <48hrs

Demonstrating his campaign's ability to ride momentum, the Obama camp has just announced that the Senator has received over $7m in small campaign donations since the polls closed on Feb. 5th! This goes down very hard for the Clinton campaign, as they just revealed that Hillary and Bill put in $5m of their own money into the campaign at the end of last month in order to stay competitive with Obama.

This is just another reason to add to the list of why Hillary should be worried right about now, written about quite adequately here by a Politico.com writer.

lhp

Super Tuesday In Bumper Sticker Form

There is a lot to learn from Super Tuesday.

And since there is so much, this will be in Bumper Sticker-form to minimize text and maximize POW-effect.

-Clinton Wins CA cuz of Latinos and Asians

-Obama Is Liked By Whites

-Obama: 14. Clinton: 8 (states)

-Hillary Wins Only Handful More Delegates Than 'O'

-McCain Wins Over Everyone, Just Not Conservatives

-Huckabee is Backabee

-Romney Needs His Own Exit Strategy

-McCain-Huckabee: 'We Fill Gaps'

-Obama: Delegate Rich, Bitch!


Up next: Obama-happy Hawai'i, Louisiana, Washington State, and Wisconsin.

lhp

Feminists and Clinton: Love and Hate

Before delving into the massive amount of information from Super Tuesday, and beginning to glean any sort of substantive meat for the upcoming dates to come, let me lightly tread on thin ice.

Feminism and Hillary. Two words that rile you up or turn you off. I am slowly tilting from one side to the other, like one of those old bobbing toys that dip into a glass of water and then back, and forth. Today, I am not getting near that water.

Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of Bill and Hillary, "sent" (it is still not confirmed by the campaign if she did or didn't) an email to all the Hillary email devotees. It linked the reader to an essay by Robin Morgan, an old school feminists, and considered one of the founders of the current wave of feminism. This essay is a part deux of an essay she wrote some decades back. It is apropriately called "Goodbye to All That (#2)."

It is a call to arms to all women to support Hillary, not because she is a woman, but because of everything else but that.

Some choice excerpts (the "he" in these selections is Obama):

"—Hillary is too ballsy but too womanly, a Snow Maiden who’s emotional, and so much a politician as to be unfit for politics.

—She’s “ambitious” but he shows “fire in the belly.” (Ever had labor pains?)

—When a sexist idiot screamed “Iron my shirt!” at HRC, it was considered amusing; if a racist idiot shouted “Shine my shoes!” at BO, it would’ve inspired hours of airtime and pages of newsprint analyzing our national dishonor.

—Young political Kennedys—Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr.—all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort “See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him.” (Personally, I’m unimpressed with Caroline’s longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe’s suicide, and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick.) "

She calls attention to the Clinton-hate out there:

"Goodbye to the most intimately violent T-shirts in election history, including one with the murderous slogan “If Only Hillary had married O.J. Instead!” Shame.

Goodbye to Comedy Central’s “Southpark” featuring a storyline in which terrorists secrete a bomb in HRC’s vagina. I refuse to wrench my brain down into the gutter far enough to find a race-based comparison. For shame."

And the usual feminist arguments:

"Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy; being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless.

We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah, female genital mutilation, witch burnings, stonings, and attempted gynocides.

We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it never was about qualifications after all.

We know that at this historical moment women experience the world differently from men—though not all the same as one another—and can govern differently, from Elizabeth Tudor to Michele Bachelet and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf."

Fair enough.

This is not about that, anymore. The same argument can be made for Obama: slavery, segregation, lynching, discrimination, rape, ridicule, regress, poverty, genocide, assimilation, and many more powerful, and equally true terms to send sirens and tempers flying. I will not dismiss one argument or the other. I believe both are equally important and will be an issue this election with those type of people that are either motivated to vote because of an opposition to all of this, or motivated to stop the candidate because of an approval (if only tacitly) of all of this.

Where she misses the point is that her arguments are not that, but hyperboles. And badly aimed hyperboles at that.

Those remarks, attacks, and opposition against Hillary cannot be classified as "hate against women," just as the remarks made by Joe Biden about Obama are not "hate against blacks." They are only there because a she is there. An issue would be raised also if Mitt Romney were the front-runner (ooooh, a Mormon!), or Huckabee (a crazy Southerner!), or Kucinich (a hippie!). They would be an issue in a lesser degree, but still an issue.

That attitude toward Hillary and women in power is not because of 'hate.' But because of 'fear.' Fear of change, mostly. Changing the status quo is a scary thought for many ingrained in their ways. This is different from what Obama has and will experience. Obama is going against fear AND hate. Even the 'hate' written about here is relegated to fringe groups on the extreme right. Sure, there will be uneasiness in the hearts of bigots across the country if they see Obama take the presidential oath, but it will be just that, an uneasiness with the change this country will undertake.

Back to Hillary, she is not going against a man, but a movement. Vernon Jordan, a Clinton faithful, mentioned this truth. Hillary is not going toe-to-toe with Obama, but with his movement. His movement is based on youthful idealism, hope, change, and centers around intangibles, rather than policies and wonkiness. This is exactly what the John F Kennedy movement was about. If feminists like Morgan believe Hillary is fighting against the old ways of America, they are wrong. Hillary is battling the new, the change in America. It is not because she represents the old America, but because she DOES NOT represent the new America.

This transcends gender or race. Culture,class, and expectations are motivating this battle on both sides. Feminists like Morgan cannot grasph this notion, apparently. It is all about voting because I AM this, and I AM that, not I WILL be this or I WILL be that.

lhp

At 9:05 pm PST: MSNBC Projects Hillary a Winner in CA

Too soon?

Missouri moves over to Obama's side.  

lhp

McCain: Winner and Loser

The tide is going well for the USS McCain.  However, a tempest looms.

Look at the states McCain has won thus far:

-Arizona

-New York

-Delaware

-New Jersey

-Connecticut

-Illinois

-Oklahoma

ALL of them, except Oklahoma, are NOT Republican strongholds.  He is not winning the typical Red state, or even the Red-leaning state, but Blue states.  This does not help his case with the GOP base.  Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and all the other right-wing loudmouths will love to hate him, and will have something to chew on with these wins.  A California win will cement his nomination, at least until the actual ceremony is held.  But he knows the real fight will come up.  Not with convincing some Dems and independents to vote for him, but to actually let Republicans know who the Republican candidate is.

lhp

Will the Latino Vote Bury Obama?

Based off exit polls in New York, New Jersey, Arizona, and New Mexico, one has to ask the very important question: Will the Latino vote take down Obama?

According to these exit polls, the Latino vote is flowing over to Hillary Clinton.  Why?

Two things:

-Bill Clinton

-Economy 

Latinos who are being asked why they had a 'favorable' or 'very favorable' view of Hillary mentioned the fact that Bill is her husband, and that they remember Bill's term as one of economic prosperity.  This notion, a healthy economy, is very important to Latinos and their families.

The polls in California have just closed.  The counting begins.  Clinton is ahead with the early voters.  This will soon diminish, but by how much?

"Clinton won six in 10 Hispanic voters."

-msnbc.com

Obama is ahead with white voters and black voters, a surprise and an expected outcome, respectively.  If Obama loses it will be because of the Latino surge for Clinton, and almost nothing else.

lhp

Update: MSNBC: Obama Getting Close in MA, CT

In two very important East Coast states, Obama has been bridging the gap between him and Clinton.

This is Clinton's backyard. If Obama can win, or at least be very competitive here, it says how much broad appeal he has.

lhp

Update: Clinton awarded TN by MSNBC; Ahead in MO

A key win for Clinton, if she can take MO, a swing state.

Clinton is currently ahead by a lot in NJ, but solid numbers wont come until an hour or so from now from East Coast states.

lhp

Update: NBC gives NJ to McCain

Jumping the gun over other media outlets, NBC is awarding New Jersey to McCain.

They also have Huckabee winning Georgia over McCain. With that outcome, Huckabee could be gaining some serious steam as the second-most powerful candidate in the GOP nomination run. Sorry, Romney.

For now, Romney MUST win CA in order to be viable, otherwise he is done.

Obama must wait and see what happens in NJ, NY, and CA. Hillary needs to win in CA to avoid becoming a follower rather than a co-leader in the race.

McCain, well, he just needs to go home and watch the results quietly.

lhp

Update within the Update: Clinton no longer clear winner of Oklahoma.

Update: Obama Wins Big in GA, IL

With a vote ratio of over 2:1, Obama is projected to win the state of Georgia, and his home state of Illinois, CNN reports.

Clinton has picked her first, Oklahoma, and is projected to win Alabama.

Romney has picked up his homestead, Massachussets; McCain has picked up Connecticut, Illinois, and possibly Alabama over Huckabee (!); Huckabee won the weird voting experiment called the West Virginia primary earlier today, along with a projected win in TN.

oooooh, boy. So far, few surprises. The biggest surprise might be McCain winning over Huckabee in Alabama. But overall, everything is where many (including myself) projected it to be at this point.

lhp

So far, so good: High Turnout

Turnout has increased dramatically this year compared to 2004's presidential primary, CNN reports.

"California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, the state's top elections official, said 700,000 more Californians were on voter rolls than during the 2004 presidential cycle."

lhp

Obama-Clinton Differences: Lobbyists

This pretty much reinforces the truth that Clinton will prolonge the past, while Obama will bring forth the future:

"Clinton took in $823,087 from registered lobbyists and members of their firms in 2007 and the second-biggest recipient was McCain, who took in $416,321, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based group which tracks political giving. Barack Obama, Clinton's rival for the Democratic nomination, doesn't take money from registered lobbyists, although he received $86,282 from employees of firms that lobby, according to the center"
-Yahoo News.

lhp

Deniro: Vote for Obama's Inexperience!

I love DeNiro. I love him as an amazing, courageous actor. I love him as a genuine, no-bullshit human being. And I now love him as a man who says little, but that little packs a punch.

DeNiro is endorsing Obama. How does he endorse him? In typical DeNiro way, which is to be atypical. "He had the inexperience not to support the Iraq War." Beautiful.

New Slogan:

Obama 08: Inexperience in Corruption

Obama 08: Inexperience in Arrogance

Obama 08: Inexperience in Politics-As-Usual

lhp

Momentum is a Bitch (in the Feminist sense)

'Bitch' has been a term the feminist movement has been trying to 'take back' (sense the lack of respect I have for language wars) for some time, similar to how the gay movement took back 'queer', or the african-american community changed the meaning--not definition--of the word 'nigga.'

A leading feminist magazine is Bitch. Some celebrate the word 'cunt', and even make a book out of it. Anyway...

Setting up a scenario where the first, truly viable female candidate is up for the nomination of a party that does not relegate their women to subservient roles (here is looking at you, Condi), you would think that women would embrace such a candidate. Especially feminists. Alas, momentum is a bitch (see, that is a pun). Momentum, and the fact that people are starting to see what this person is really all about--that goes for both Obama and Hillary.

Feminists in Hillary's foster home, New York, are saying Oh yes to Obama. Why? Mainly because Hillary is entrenched in the mess of the Iraq war, and because they see she really has no true convictions, only ones that pay off in votes. Obama is taking away the vote many thought was a no-brainer for Hillary only a few months ago: the New Yorkian feminist. What is next?

The downfall.

lhp

Why Obama Will Win Supah Dupah Tuesday. Yessir.

McCain is pretty much the bell of the ball. Romney is just watching the John McCain parade ride by, and all he can do is ask for a ride in the back. That is, of course, McCain pulls a Howard Dean "Yargggh".

That is to be determined...but not expected.

Leaving the Dark Side behind, what of the Democrats?

John Edwards is out, and at the moment, he has nowhere he would like to call home. He has not endorsed anyone, and only a matter of drama-queenery will make him endorse someone before Super Tuesday. I am putting my money on Obama, mostly because John Edwards ended making an ad-hoc alliance at the end of his campaign, pinning Hillary as the old hack, and them two as the faces (pretty ones, I might add) of change. We shall wait and see.

What about the other sorta-important Democrat who dropped out, Gov. Richardson of New Mexico? Obama. He has mentioned his respect for him. This little anecdote gives away the gist like a modern-day hollywood trailer. There goes some latinos for Obama.

So where does that leave us? Obama vs. Hillary in the most populous states yet to vote. You have Illinois, California, New York, New Jersey, Georgia, and New Mexico, among others, voting on Feb. 5th. Who wins big, who loses steam, or will it be a quagmire to be decided in Ohio (shiver)?

Obama will win big, and here is why: He will take his acropolis, Illinois, along with his new adopted home, Kansas. Georgia will be Obama purple, mainly because of his african-american following, and the support Edwards will bring to the Obama camp (hey, he wants to give the VP business one more run--and god knows Obama is no Kerry). Edwards brings Union support, working class-support, and the leftiest of the base left that scurried off the Kucinich and Gravel ship as it sank. This will secure Georgia (expect a decisive win there).

That leaves some giants: California, New York, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Clinton will get her own adopted home (yes, adopted), New York, but not by a large margin. Her lead has diminished there, and she has taken it for granted. New Jersey will be Obama! I know, I know, this is highly improbable, but so was the lead Obama has taken away from Clinton in almost every state she took for won. He will not win big...but win indeed. A slim margin will still make NJ Obama country.

That leaves California and New Mexico. Dare I say: Obama. New Mexico is not as much a certainty as California, but Richardson's endorsement will cement sufficient of a margin to give him the state--he is very respected there, and easily won re-election the last time he asked for it. California seems to be the prize of all prizes. It should be. The delegate-rich state bumped its primary up to Feb. 5th, making it as important as Ahnuld believed it should be, and I agree with him there. Hillary's lead is no longer an insurmountable hill. It is now a vision of dreams past.

Obama will win California, mainly because California has added the most amount of new voters (a very Obama-prone group) to the rolls since 2000 than any other state, close to three million. His african-american support, and growing (yet still weak) support among latinos will help. What will decide is the fact that independents can vote in the Dem. primary in CA...not in the Republican primary. Independents FLOCK to Obama and McCain. Obama is on the Democratic ballot, McCain is not. It is simple math.

Obama will win CA, NJ, NM, GA, and KS, among others. Hillary will have to settle for New York and Arizona (maybe). Obama will mark his territory and paint the town purple.

If this is not the case, no worries. Ohio comes up next, and thanks to the support of John Edwards and Teddy Kennedy, Obama will handedly win this Union friendly, working-class heavy state.

Oh yeah, and don't forget Oprah, who has left the shadows to once again bring the "You Go Girl" vote back to Barack.

Sorry, Hillary, you tigah now.

lhp

No Country For Old Men

Sure, the Oscars are just around the corner. Sure, I consider myself a movie buff.  Sure, this movie's buzz merits a viewing faster than you can say 'dixie.' So why did it take me so long for me to go see it? I blame society.

No Country For Old Men falls neatly after I just saw Juno and There Will Be Blood, because, in a sense, it is a bit of a mixture of both.  Juno is the unconventional comedy that works hard for a genuine chuckle, rather than a cheap gut laugh.  There Will Be Blood is the visually stunning, chilling drama that lingers...mostly for its brash approach and how it beckons people to choose to either love or hate some of its most intriguing moments.  NCFOM is somewhere in between, but above both. 

The direction of the Cohen brothers needs another round of applause like I need another reason to procrastinate.  But here it is, anyway: This is not as good as Fargo. It is better.  I know that is tantamount to being sacrilegious in the art of filmmaking, but I whole-heartedly believe it.  This movie is as if Fargo was stripped of all the quirks that quickly became part of the Cohen brand (which some people hate them for), and was left with only lean, fat-free raw meat. 

When the movie is meant to be funny, it is, but not right away.  The Cohen brand of humor is much more natural, as if you were joking around with a good friend when you are in your 50's, not when you are 15, as many movies try to get their laughs.  And the Cohen brothers have such a handle on pacing that it never feels as if the scene is lingering for too long or if the next scene was rushed.  This serves as a great way for them to make this movie a spectacular showcase of their talents.  While I felt that There Will Be Blood is a movie that you admire more than love, NCFOM is one you love for how admirable it is.  The suspense and thrill packed in this movie is razor-sharp.  If you have seen Fincher's Zodiac, then you might feel a bit of deja vu when you see some of the most tense scenes in NCFOM.  They both use great positioning of the viewer to maximize the tension, all the while taking the time necessary to make you want to squirm.

This movie is not just a celebration of the directors.  The ensemble cast deserves a hearty helping of praise.  The cast won the SAG's Best Ensemble Cast award, and I damn sure should have.  Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Tommy Lee Jones, Woody Harrelson, Kelly Macdonald, are all amazing.  Bardem has already won or been nominated for every award under the sun, probably including Best 4-star crash rating, Best Rap Video of the Year, and the toothpaste dentists recommend the most, but it is well deserved.  In my book, he is this year's Forest Whitaker, poised to win his Oscar.  His consistently unnerving and complex Chigurh is the embodiment of the Modern, or New, Man.  He has a ruthless code of ethics, that are really not that ethical.  His intentions surpass money, women, or fame.  He has no intentions, but to do what he wants and control the destiny of as many as he can.  His violent streak is ingrained in him.  It is not a part of him, it IS him.  He shows no emotion, except for a cocky smile every now and then.  The ending is a matter of much contention.  It should be.  But I believe it is really the best way to end the allegory that is NCFOM.  The New Man and the Old Man are in this world...what does that mean?  Where are we headed? Who will survive?

The Old Man is Tommy Lee Jones' Sheriff Bell.  He has his own code of ethics, and indeed they are ethical.  He is often surprised at how people can act so unhuman-like.  What happened to the humanity in humanity?  He is philosophical, he takes his time, and he cherishes the occasional banter with his wife and colleagues.  He is the Old Man.  This is no longer a country for him.  Tommy Lee Jones should be yelling and storming around, with the lack of respect he has received from the higher ups in Oscardom for his outstanding performance.  Just watching him ponder and philosophize is a treat.  You can see how much fun he is having with himself, and you can see how much he is empathizing with a man in his situation: a good man trying to make some good come out of this hellish mess between guys who are not Old, but New, and have no respect for the old ways of living.

The other New Man is Josh Brolin's Llewelyn Moss.  A hunter, a Texan, a man in the middle.  He is not Old like Bell, but he is also not New like Chigurh.  He has believes in doing good, but he also wants his own piece of the pie.  He smirks at life AND death, but only with a bit of displeasure coming with it.  His wife (Macdonald) is a great exposer of his rugged and soft side.  With her, he is kind, teasing, brash, old-school masculine, and new-school feminine.  He is brought to this hell because he was greedy enough to take the money, and because he was nice enough to help someone one out.  Where does that put him? It puts him in what Jones' Bell calls the "mess".

No Country For Old Men may not be a perfect movie, with the displeasure some of its scenes (especially its ending) and tones might cause in many, or the fact that it plays with the audience a bit, switching moods fast enough to make the weak hearted get queasy.  It is pretty close to perfection, though.  If you hold Fargo near and dear to your heart, then let me introduce you to its older brother.