Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Why I'm voting for Hillary

If you're not into politics, this will be a very boring post. Consider yourself warned.

With Super Tuesday over and nothing decided on the democrat side, I felt the need to write something about my choice, if only to get my thoughts on paper. I don't expect to sway anyone or anything like that, but the more I've seen, the more strongly I feel that Hillary Clinton is the right choice for the democratic nomination.

On the most basic issue, policy, almost everyone concedes that their views are "almost indistinguishable." (New Yorker) That being said, Hillary is, in general, very slightly further to the left than Obama, with the biggest difference being her support for Universal Health Care. But both support immigration reform and both vow to pull troops out of Iraq in a short time, so it's not like we're talking about a huge gap. What the decision comes down to, then, is the old "experience versus change" argument. But what real "change" would Obama bring that Hillary wouldn't?

Which brings me to my next point. I would be happy and proud to have Obama as president, but his rhetoric of change and the support he's gaining is starting to resemble a personality cult. I'm not saying he actively avoids discussing issues; I think he started the campaign with that strategy, but jettisoned it quickly when Hillary jumped to her early lead. What I am saying is that when he gets into what I'll call "preacher" mode, policy issues disappear and it becomes all oratorial flash.

Everyone who sees Obama speak in public says how magnetic he is, and it's certainly apparent on television as well. There's a genuine inspirational quality about him. But let's not forget, Ronald Reagan had that too. Charisma doesn't always translate into great leadership, or great ideas. He's managed to galvanize the youth population, but I think there's something a little worrisome about that.

And before I continue, let me add this caveat: a few weeks ago, I was on the Obama train. My thought was that the raw force the man exuded was exactly what the country needed. But after reading and studying more, it's apparent to me that there's an act of seduction going on that can be construed as slightly disingeuous, on his behalf, and slightly credulous on the part of youth. The more I speak with Obama supporters, and let me again clarify that I was just as guilty recently, the more I realize that they don't have a command of the issues, but that they've simply fallen under the sway of his charm. And there's something to be said for a personality of that nature, especially in a position of leadership like the presidency, but for so many people to choose based on that alone is scary.

Enough, for now, about Obama. Let's get into the positives about Hillary.

*Toughness - Hillary has been vilified from day one, and for no better reason, at least originally, than being a First Lady with the audacity to pursue policy. She's always been a strong personality, and people bridled at that. When she introduced Universal Health Care reform in '94, it was defeated by the Republicans in what amounted to petty, partisan politics. Something that could have greatly helped the uninsured in the country failed merely because of conservatives hating Hillary. When the Lewinsky scandal reached its apex, Hillary was, astoundingly, vilified again. Some wanted her to leave her husband, and railed against her for "setting the cause of feminism back fifty years," and many accused her of staying with Bill for personal gain only. Never has a woman trying to hold a family together under impossible circumstances been so excoriated. Then, when she ran for Senator in New York, she was vilified again for having the gall to run for office and possibly harbor presidential ambitions. Rick Lazio, her opponent, even approached her aggressively during one of the debates. And now, finally, she's running for president and is vilified by both parties.

And throughout it all, what's happened? She's stayed strong, and she keeps winning. Show me anyone else who could have gone through that kind of hell, with unfiltered hating pouring in from all sides, and still maintained their character, grown as a politican, and grown as a person.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, is tougher than Hillary.


*Experience- some are trying to frame this as the "experience versus change" decision. But again, what change, really, will Obama bring? Their policies are virtually the same, and what the "change" comes down to is the perceived notion that Obama's personality will somehow bridge gaps between Republicans and Democrats and set our country on a new, united path.

Dream on. I'm all for idealism, but if people truly think a black liberal from Chicago is going to win the hearts and minds of neocons and red staters, and if they think the Republican political machine, built for twenty years on the premise of dirty politics, wil lie down and die when faced with such a uniter, they need to wake up. There's a rift in America, and if the rift can ever be healed, it will be done with policy, not rhetoric. And when it comes to policy, Hillary's bringing the same exact change.

So if we put that idea aside, we're left with experience. When discussing their policies, although the general framework is the same, Hillary approaches with more pragmatism. She goes into details, some of which are boring because they're intricate and well thought-out. Obama speaks in generalities, focusing instead on the idea of a catalyzing change that will erase the gaps among Americans. Forced to choose between those two alternatives, I fall on the side of pragmatism. Hillary is a policy wonk, and I truly believe her when she says she'll be ready, on day one, to take over. She's thought everything through, certainly more than Obama (as I'll show later), and has real plans on every single aspect of governance.

To me, that's everything.


*Hard work - just as nobody's tougher than Hillary, nobody works harder. Even her detractors concede the point that, throughout her career as First Lady, advocate, Senator, and presidential hopeful, she's a dedicated, and at times obsessive, leader. A quick example is her newly-learned expertise on defense policy since taking her place on the Senate Armed Services Committee. There are a thousand more. Meanwhile, since becoming chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's subcommittee on foreign affairs, Obama hasn't held a single substantive hearing. A lot of that owes to time spent on the campaign trail, but it's certainly worth noting. In the end, we really don't know how hard he'll work, or how prepared he'll be for either the Republican attack machine or the presidency itself. Is that a chance we can afford to take? What do we really know about this guy?

And though Hillary takes a ton of flack for her so-called "ambition," (which, let's be honest, exists; nobody runs for president without ambition), it's Obama who strikes me as the more nakedly opportunistic. He's basically rode a tide of rhetorical flair to the nomination process at an incredibly young age, and without his qualities as a speaker, he'd be nowhere near his current position. He's certainly more calculating than Hillary. Which leads me to....


*Caring - this is an out-and-out personal call, but from watching Hillary speak, and hearing anecdotes about her more private moments, I'm convinced that she legitimately cares about people. She's spent a career advocating for the lower middle class and those below the poverty line. Her focus on education, health care, and immigration reform confirms the idea. If she plays dirty politics, or is accused by pundits of being cutthroat, I genuinely believe it's because she thinks she can help the most people, and desperately wants her vision instituted for America's benefit.

I don't mean to imply that Obama doesn't care. I'm just not convinced his desire for the presidency is 100% about caring. I think there's more personal ambition involved than in Hillary's case.


*Electability - This is the biggest knock on Hillary. The talking point among her opponents is that she won't be able to reach out to undecided voters, or to hold the middle ground, while Obama's charisma has a greater chance to make up the gap. I find that attitude to be completely flawed. Kerry was nominated on this premise in '04, and he got destroyed by the Republican attack machine. Keep in mind, the guy was a Vietnam hero and was running against the worst president in recent memory. And he still lost! It proves that the Republicans can and will go after anyone, no matter how unimpeachable their character seems. They'll go after Obama with the same fervor. Hillary, on the other hand, is tough as nails. People call her unlikeable, but watching her speak and watching her newly adopted tone of positivity and focus on policy, I can't see it. I think her character shines through, and I think her strength will become evident to more and more people. And she's already proven she can withstand the conversative attack. I envision a general election where she gains more and more support as people start to realize her true character, especially against a rigid guy like McCain. On the other hand, I can easily see Obama's rhetoric being exposed as a vapid defense mechanism for lack of experience.

And as a final, practical point, let's not forget that Hispanic voters have shown zero willingness, historically, to vote for a black candidate. That held true last night, which seems to indicate that it won't change in the near future. That could be a gigantic problem in swing states with large Hispanic populations, particularly Florida.


What it comes down to, in the end, is that I find Hillary to be a more pragmatic, prepared candidate. I think she's better equipped to lead the country, has more thoroughly researched solutions for the myriad problems caused by the Bush administration, and is overall more legitimate. The results of Super Tuesday seem to hold that up; she scored a huge victory among those in need, such as the working class, the elderly, and Hispanic minorities. Obama's main voters can all be attributed to his personality and "realm of influence," which includes black voters, youth, and undecided voters hoping to feel excited. It seems to lend credence to a very controversial, but perhaps valid, quote from a Clinton staffer:

"If you have a social need, you're with Hillary. If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend, and you're young, and you have no social needs, then he's cool."


Personally, I'm going with substance over style.

Monday, January 28, 2008

Here's something about a phrase

Note: Crossword challenge didn't go off. At my new place, the newspaper kept getting stolen. At work, ditto. I threatened the careless apes at the New York Times without pause, but finally I had to concede and cancel the paper.


On to business. Back in the sixties, hippies used to say "let's blow this joint." They meant, "let's smoke this marijuana." Somehow, over time, the phrase evolved to mean "let's get out of here."

(Please note that I'm not 100% sure any of that is true. "Joint" is also an older term meaning "place," so it's very possible that "blow this joint" pre-dates the hippies. I could look this up, but I prefer to operate on conjecture and guesswork.

edit: I was completely wrong)

Anyway, at some point it became cool for just about everyone to say "let's blow this joint." It was appropriated by the mainstream, losing the connotations of a licentious, pot-smoking lifestlye.

There is a new phrase undergoing this process of incorporation.

"Blow one's load (early)."

Back in 1981, young people who were judged popular would say "he blew his load" to mean that some contemporary or other had orgasmed. It became common in the argot of youth.

Over time, the phrase evolved to mean committing too much of any resource too early in a given process, thereby precluding later success.

Example: McEnroe came out with a lot of energy, but he really blew his load in the first two sets. By the fourth, Borg was running him all over the court.

Now, the phrase doesn't even elicit a giggle when used in that context. It hasn't made its way to television or mainstream print yet, but its presence in ordinary conversation means that the shift can't be far off.

But we will know its origin.

On Friday, I'll have a piece on McSweeney's. It's about football and authors. Keep an eye out.

Wednesday, January 2, 2008

Stymied: The Crossword Challenge is shot in the starting gate

I recently packed my belongings and tramped eastward into New Bushwick. I phoned the New York Times in an appropriate manner, but they failed to forward Monday's paper. Or, perhaps, it was stolen. In either case, I didn't take lunch Monday and forgot to buy a paper, and yesterday found me out of sorts due to Spirits imbibed on the 31st. By the time I remembered anything about a Crossword, the paper had again been appropriated by the private sector.

Judging by today's smooth delivery, the Times and I are back on similar wavelengths, and the challenge is on for next week.

There Will Be Blood is an excellent movie.

Friday, December 28, 2007

The Great New Year Crossword Challenge: A Quest For Perfection

The New York Times Crossword, according to legions of cruciverbalists, is the creme de la creme of American puzzles. Since watching the documentary "Wordplay" in the spring of 2006, I've been haunting the nether regions of the weekday Arts Section, scribbling away at the various acrostics. Looking back, the beginning was shameful- the puzzle increases in difficulty as the week progresses, and those first Mondays and Tuesdays were mildly difficult, Wednesdays were a challenge, and Thursdays and Fridays were impossible.

ALL THIS HAS CHANGED.

My skill has improved gradually, and I'm at a point where a missed box Monday through Wednesday is an anomaly, Thursday success rate is at or near 80%, and Friday hovers around 50%. From where the sun now stands, a perfect week is distinctly possible. I may have already achieved this phenomenon, or perhaps not; I haven't kept track.

But starting next week, the GREAT NEW YEAR CROSSWORD CHALLENGE is on:

**Complete all five puzzles in one business week, Monday through Friday, to perfection, with no missed letters and without reference to secondary materials**

I'll update each afternoon, except for Tuesday, which is January 1st and doesn't require me to work. I'll update Tuesday's puzzle on Wednesday morning.

The stakes: If I fail, I have to clean the doorstep of every man in town for two moon cycles. If I succeed, I choose my first wife from the eligible women of the village.


Also, "Wordplay" is a fun documentary to see if you haven't already. It's like watching the spelling bee, except the contestants are older nerds, with the pain of life well-etched on their faces. The filmmakers follow some of the best puzzlers around in the weeks and months leading up to the climax, when all in question converge on a Connecticut hotel for the annual crossword championship. The finish is dramatic. There are also cameos from famous crossword puzzlers like Bill Clinton and Jon Stewart.

See you on Monday.

Friday, December 21, 2007

Life Lessons for Women

Today I taught a life lesson to a woman on g-mail chat. We can call her Emily.


me: let me tell you something emily
a life lesson
if you were nice
like me
you'd have over 100 dollars in gift certificates
to various dunkin donuts and barnes & noble type places
all from bosses at work, mind you

emstrachan: yeah im getting nothin for xmas

me: instead, you're at home with nothing to your name but a frown and some vague ideas

emstrachan: grinch
way to rub it in

me: people love me
that's the point i'm trying to make

emstrachan: i get it ok!

me: i ask around here about you
nobody knows you
i show them pictures of you
they don't really say much at all
they just give me a look that says "i don't know what to say to this"

emstrachan is offline.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Crass Historical Motherfucker: In the Building!

Yay-yo yay-yo, diggity dayity
cancel all my calls to the rain-drop deity
I know he ain't recognize my spontaneity
like the Pope ain't speaking straight to the laity


Word and power, brothers in things past, I am the Crass (gasp!) Historical (what?) Motherfucker (drop that song, make it long, turn it hostile with a gong!).


Today, brothers, I got some improper shit on the mind. I'm like Vlad the Impaler on a rainy morning when he feeling itchy, dig? Your mind be doing more revolutions than all of Central America since back in the day! My ideas is iller than the Incas after Francisco P. gave them diseases!


First off, yo, before we gets to bullets, I want to address a point. I heard some rattety-tattety-scim-scam-scattety coward-boom-battety Kats on the message boards talking shit 'bout how the CHM ain't truly crass. Say what? Get out my nest with them critiques, blood! If a fruitcake expect me to be getting crass in the modern way, he done ignored the Historical in my name. And I sure as gutters ain't doing no old-school crasstastic material, cuz them fools was dirty beyond what's cool. I got to live in this day and age, heard, so I don't make time with no old school savagery. I'm serious, y'all- medieval brains basically invented forty-six ways to violate a dude in what folks in the know call "the prison way." They only had a mind for one sort of crass behavior, but brother did they expound. You couldn't barely haggle with a crippled dude hawking gourds without the man making promises about your rectum and the town's bluntest object (oftentimes the gourd itself). I'm just saying.

So I crass lively in the middle ground, best I know how. On to the bullets:


*The Crass Historical Motherfucker be wondrin' why any respecting twee-bird would cotton to routine showerin' of a morning. Does the ign'rent fool misunderstand some basic facts about time and washing hoh^ body?

^Let me interrupt myself. HOH is a word adopted by folks of politically correct ideas to mean 'his or her.' You ain't suppose to denote particular gender when talkin' in the universal, and typing out 'his or her' can get bulkier than the Holy Roman Empire in the days of its penchant for overextending. Maybe you think hoh is a bullshit pronoun, but I ask y'all to consider the Amish. Those backward barn-dwelling haters use the pronoun 'hine' on holidays and special occasions. That's some ancient English. If they gonna hold on to old usage like it was a thing, I can't hardly fault no feminist with bad teeth, loud concepts, and armpits like a dude for hatching her own style. I'm on board, Pat (insert your favorite androgynous girl name if you're of a mind).

Back to the thing-which-is-next-to-Godliness. I've known some humans in my day, and not many was nocturnal. We go about our day getting dirty in a thousand ways. This is a fact even Doubting Thomas wouldn't dispute. So what sense does it make to sleep in that filth? Shower by night, fool! Then rest your night hours stationary, like 99.9% of mankind will, and a morning shower is 8 kinds of redundant- as long as you keep a clean bed! I got some ideas 'bout that, too, but I wouldn't want to bore a brother. Point is this: standing under the nozzle in concert with a rising sun is equal parts foolish with sending your Mongol sailboats to Japan in the season of Kamikaze wind. It's bad timing, yo!


*There's a tune out in recent times called "2080" by the band Yeasayer. A dullard who half-reads the CHM, mouthing every word and taking breaks to lick peanut butter from his fingernail, still understands I ain't a homeboy much interested in the future. Such a song title, you'd think, would send me on coughing fits to a dusty museum. But this shit is timeless, yo! It spits more arsenic than Napoleon on Saint Helena, and I mean that in the best way. And much as a dude digs on things historic, I do value an era with buttons that rewind a tune without fuss. Sometimes you want to hear a song 84 times in a row, and let no man tell me that's wrong. Plus, it do beat listening to some frizz-haired prophet-without-a-home preach Leviticus on the gray underground, with his jaundice eyes and above average hysteria potential.


*Riffing on subways, I want to let y'all know of a poster that spouts some serious spurious information. Come as it do from a clothing store called Daffy's, it ain't likely to fool a discriminating man no-how, but still and all I got obligations for even the least of our kind. To a basic point, Daffy's promises "High fashion. Low prices." Maybe that idea holds some charm for you. But I have it on good authority, from a girl who knows more than how to put on a pair of pants, that any dude wearing Daffy's threads might as well be burning a cross among the one group of Crusaders that knew how to fight, far as his chances of impressing go. Don't wear Daffy's!


*The Crass Historical Motherfucker wishes to give props to the AFL-CIO for no special reason other than a feeling of 'preciation. The fellow who works for his scratch is ever vulnerable, past what's proper. Don't forget, my peoples, we're spinning on a planet where men of power kept slaves until modern minds got some higher ideas. If somebody don't protect the steadiest shoulders, the bluest collars, in no time flat they'll be toiling extra hours for the right not to be jailed with men of low mind. Good looking out, AFL-CIO!


*Lastly, an epiphany. The CHM realized of late why a soul with liberal ideas got to wear morals on its sleeve, and why a conservative seems overall reserved on the matter. It hit me, yo: a conservative ain't got to have morals, because hos (he or she) has the smarmy confidence of a thing been proven time and again: money concerns gonna trump all in the end. A liberal is like a Hiroshima school kid shooting rubber bands at the Enola Gay.

Yo, I didn't say it was a happy thing. Some days don't end happy, brothers. Some words bring rain. Some history ain't bear repeating, but that don't mean it won't come 'round no-how.








Nah, fucks to that. Let's end high: the CHM met a female. She was straight wearing a tricorn and handing out pamphlets for a re-enactment of Bastille Day. Instant chemistry. I'll keep a steady reader updated. Big promises and love,

-THE CRASS HISTORICAL MOTHERFUCKER.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

An Item to Discuss

No man or woman of the city may call me a follower of pop culture. It would be a ridiculous assertion. I do not while away the hours lauding the latest celebrity triumph or excoriating their mishaps. I keep a respectful distance, recognizing the power while quietly maintaining my polite disinterest.

Yet a man can't keep from reading posters on the subway. It is natural for the eye to wander, as history teaches. Lately, I've been inundated with the idea of Tyra Banks as a talk show host. A former model, Banks is apparently making the leap to television. This is as much as I know. The posters, featuring the star in various smiling poses, suggest an atmosphere of intriguing, impish fun. Words like "Conversationalist" (playing off the idea of a conservationist, which we may safely assume Miss Banks is not) are emblazoned across their center. Another poster says "Gabology," conveying the concept of Banks as an instructor, albeit in a nontraditional field.

Enough description. Here is the plain fact: Tyra Banks has a weak face. She looks like someone who had to watch an aggressive uncle beat a pet dog to death at age seven. Since then, her smile is a defense. She shrinks at meeting new people. Confidence in herself is shattered. She fights a constant battle to forget the harsh world impinging on her purple thoughts.

The hype for her new talk show seems sad and desperate, like a spastic vegan hawking his wares at a gun show in Abilene, Texas. The more we see of Miss Banks, the more eager her promotion, the more we are prepared for her failure. She plainly lacks the composition to hold together a dinner party, much less a television show. Jay Leno, smirking like a fat pasha, will be using her name as a punch line in mere months.

I have a new idea for a poster. It shows America in a post-apocalyptic moment. Tyra Banks and an unidentified man are the last two people on Earth. She is wrapped in black fabric. An earthquake has split the ground before them. The man, with a near-hysterical expression, is hanging from the ledge, having been caught in the new crevice. It is obvious he has protected her in the days since the old world ended, keeping her from catastrophe. Now, having fallen to ill fortune, he merely needs her hand. But Banks, traumatized, can only rock back and forth in the fetal position, gripping her dark cloak. She seems him out of the corner of her eye, but is paralyzed to the point of inaction.

Beneath, the caption reads:

Tyra Banks Will Let This Man Die.


We know you are weak, Tyra Banks.

Monday, November 26, 2007

Expressions!

Shit evolves when I discuss business with Kyle. Today:

"That show is so good, you'll start humping the air."


We have: AN EXPRESSION.

Other examples a person might use:

"Man, that new line of Nissan Altimas make me straight up hump the air."

"This top 40 song is so hot, you'll get orgasms from oxygen."

"That actual orgasm was so poor, I felt like I was humping the air in Denver."




(The air is thinner in Denver. It's not a good place to hump the air.)



In other news, if an office puts exotic trees all around, they're basically telling you they want to make the place a jungle. That means that all the laws of the jungle apply. Be aggressive if you can, and be careful if you can't. Personally, I just released a boa. I don't know what to expect, but havoc is a safe bet.

Friday, October 5, 2007

Oh the Misanthropic Topical Arrangement...

Kelly, get in the OWNED line. Here's me owning her while she tries to apply for a class at an improv theater:



Me: I just applied for an experimental improv class
Her: applied??
Her: how do you apply?
Me: yeah you have to write in and apply
Me: they review everyone
Her: sounds cool
Me: hopefully it works out
Her: what the hell...it doesn't say how to apply...
Her: do you write a letter or what?
Me: you have to do a 200-word paragraph
Her: i don't get how they're supposed to review anything about you
Me: about what your goals are in improv
Me: and like your comedy idols and stuff
Her: oh
Me: i think they just go on the essay
Her: where does it say that?
Me: in the about section on the webslant
Her: fuck man...all i see is to see the instructions below and there are none
Me: did you click the webslant?
Her: what's a webslant?
Me: the part with the star on top
Me: the about section
Her: this is the page i'm looking at: (link)
Her: which part are you talking about?
Me: wait how many times did you refresh
Me: just now
Her: uhh i don't know. i didn't refresh
Me: ok so you're fine
Me: just visit the webslant and click the star
Her: what is a webslant shane
me: by the about section?
me: do you want me to just write your essay?
Her: fucking nevermind




Punchline: There is no such thing as a webslant.


Someone get that girl a weep-dish pizza.