Maine Really is a Cultural Backwater

For years I've heard people whine about how Maine is a cultural backwater- no theatre, music (classical and ethnic that is), or art. I never really took these criticisms to heart until I realized I'd have to drive 45 minutes to Westbrook or South Portland to see Children of Men. COM isn't an independent film, its a major action release. Oh well I can always go see Rocky 6 for the 4th time (just kidding I wouldn't let Sylvester Stalone have my money if he was starving).

Funk Self Regulating Profession's Racketeering

One reason why finance is better than accounting and law: you can test into it yourself without wasting your time "earning" a degree. By making you log 200 credits or whatever to become a Certified Public Accountant and spend 3 years of your life getting a JD these professions essentially limit the members of these professions to those chosen few with enough patience to waste their time on whatever unimportant minutiae you gain from continuing your "education" in these "fields". If you aren't operating on people or building rockets you don't need in class instruction, pick up a book and learn yourself.

That's why I recommend the Chartered Financial Analyst to ambitious liberal arts degree holders. No bullshit classes, just self teaching and straight up testing. Kind of strange considering finance is more technical than law or accounting.

Obama's Catch 22- Damned cause he's black, and uh Damned again cause he's black

Mainstream America wants a black president. It wants a president that embraces middle class mainstream meritocratic American values that just happens to be black. Remember even Tenessee (yee ha bang bang) almost elected Harold Ford the last time around.

What America will never accept in a president; however, is a black from the gimme gimme blacks first wing of the democratic party.

Obama's inexperience and skeletons (past drug use, shady land deals, avid smoker) are second and third to Obama's "black problem".

Al Sharpton is considering a run and many other black politicians have questioned Obama's "blackness". Obama may be forced to kowtow to this constituency to have a shot at the nomination. This is a huge problem considering that the inner city wing of the democratic party isn't well liked by um anyone. Nobody that watches Charley Rangel on CNN isn't secretly wishing that he'll shut the hell up.

Already Obama has been praising the likes of Jesse Jackson, spewing lines like "if it wasn't for Jesse's runs in 84 and 88 I wouldn't have the opportunity I have today".

The inner city wing of the democratic party has always whined about not having clout within both the government and the party commensurate with their size (a problem that could be lessened if they would actually vote in a percentage in line with other demographics), Barack Obama's candidacy may be the next victim of ther inner city political classe's vanity.

My Thoughts on Iraq

Iraq is a very complicated situation and I'm not going to pretend to know enough about it to play armchair analyst.


A few thoughts though...

Having a security presence deters violence in high crime areas but Iraq is not plagued by good old self serving crime, it is an insurgency and it could very well provoke a significant amount of new violence.

Dispersing American soldiers from fortified compounds to smaller, more vulnerable locations will result in more deaths than we are presently used to.

There should be some solid protests in the next few months, not just the weak stuff launched by extreme leftists over the last 4 years.

Politically it might help Bush and McCain to have the democrats stop the troop surge by denying funding- it makes the democrats look like obstructionists. McCain can argue that the democrats lossed in Iraq if his policy isn't given an opportunity.

I'm inclined to believe that the surge will not work just because most generals believe that it won't.

Information Request

If anybody gets breaking news about candidates either running for president or not running for president please let me know (call me) immediately.

I am especially interested in hearing about whether any of the major candidates that I am writing about drop out, and whether or not a juicy wild card (Mark Warner, Al Gore, Jeb Bush) jumps in.

If the information is timely enough, a good informant may get a free dinner from me, which is especially valuable considering I generally charge people to hang out with me.

Pursuit of Happyness: 3 Sentence Movie Review

Not as sappy as it appears on the surface. Good ole socio-economic discrimination, no racism here. Funny that a story about meritocracy stars Will Smith's son.

Republican Presidential Breakdown

John McCain would like to have his cake and eat it too. He'd like to preserve his non-partisan image and still win enough religious conservatives to gain the nomination. This is impossible. That's why he has been calling for more troops in Iraq in an effort to out-conservative all the other candidates. John McCain is too smart to think that adding more troops will better the situation; however, he knows that Bush doesn't have the political capital (his account is in the red) to pull it off. As America withdraws from Iraq, and Iraq is looked upon even more so than now as a failure, McCain will argue that America could have won if it had endured.

McCain's shift to the right is largely working; no candidate has close to the money, organization, and elite support that he has. Republicans, less so than democrats, are disposed to go with the establishment pick. McCain has been around the block, he has staying power.

With that in mind I put McCain at 40%, Romney at 20%, Gingrich at 15%, Brownback at 15%, Huckabee at 5% and the rest of the field at 5%. Romney's mormon faith and past professed support for homosexuals makes him less of a contender; however, no other republican candidate has near the executive prowess and presidential demeanor that Romney has. Gingrich's candidacy will rely much on the romance that what once was can now be: a coherent Republican machine that knows what it stands for and delivers on it's basic principles. Brownback is the most authentic conservative in the race. Though a catholic, Brownback will receive by far (we're talking 75%) the most support from the religious right (you know, the people who actually vote in republican primaries); however, unlike past religious right favorites, Brownback is a sitting senator that can not be dismissed like a Pat Robertson.

Giuliani's social beliefs make his presidential run a try out for veep, and a way to sell books and win business for his consulting firm. He would make a great addition as a veep (especially in trying to win states like Pennsylvania and New Hampshire).

Children of Men: 3 sentence movie review

Best movie I've seen since The Departed. Solid dystopian fiction. Amazingly realistic urban warfare scenes.

By Popular Demand

Many Readers (2 so far, comprising 50% of my audience) have wondered about my position on the Presidential race, probably since my prior post may be interpreted as fawning over John Edwards.

First things first, I did not have sexual relations with that man, my interest in him is based upon objective analysis.

Second, I was for Evan Bayh before I was against Evan Bayh (who's kicking himself for cowardly refusing the last presidential race which he could have won).

Third, I was for Mark Warner until he wussed out a few months ago. Mark Warner may still run once Clinton, Obama, and Edwards have wounded eachother if no other popular moderate condidate has emerged. Warner was in danger of peaking too early so he bowed out for "family reasons". I'd definately be a Warner man- who doesn't want a proven Governor who made 200 million (think Nextel) himself to be their president?

Edwards is in bed with the unions. I've always wondered why vehicles that allow workers to collude are legal while collusion by firms (which are treated as individuals under the law) is illegal.

In terms of policy I'm probably with Vilsack (good DNC man) . Although Richardson could convince me. Bloomberg may run as an independent, I'd be with him were it not for his trans-fat ban in NYC.

Vilsack's blandness may hurt his electability so I guess I'd have a slight preference for Richardson because I'd take any of the big six over any of the Republicans (yes, even McCain = sell out).

Long Time Coming

This post is for the ten or so people who actually read my blogging sporadically in the past. It's been a year since I've posted. I don't know why it's been so long, seeing as I like shooting my mouth off.

On a personal note, I am leaving my position as a fund accountant at State Street Corporation in Boston tomorrow and I will be attending Marine Corps Officer Candidate School in Quantico for 3 months starting January 20, after which time I will decide upon whether to accept a commision and the bonus I'd be entitled to - a trip to a warm, exotic place.

In case anybody cares, here are some general and specific thoughts and predictions on the current political climate:

Handicapping the Democrats P2008 (assuming Warner and Gore don' t run) : Hillary 20%, Obama 20%, Edwards 35%, Vilsack 7%, Richardson 7%, Biden 7%, others 4%. I don't think Kerry will run (not that he would matter anyways). Kucinich is a nonfactor (though he did place 3rd in the Maine primary last time around. Senator Dodd has no niche or flare, though he may run. Clark is old news though he may run and he could find his way on to the ticket as Veep.

That's right, I said it, Edwards is the frontrunner. This is because presidential pimaries are about momentum. Edwards has proved that he has staying power and given his incredible rhetorical skills (the upside to being akin to a used car salesman) he could catch fire in Iowa. The Iowa caucus was mad for John Edwards. I've seen the guy speak, he inspires confidence in his fellow men. Edwards has been working hard to carve himself out a niche with organized labor, and distance himself from the Iraq War, something that's easier for him to do than Clinton because he's out of office.

Clinton peaked 2 years ago and she's been getting sniped at for months as the prohibitive frontrunner. She's in the worst position that she could be in at this point. All the fundraising power and elite support she has earned since her election in 2000 can't get her the nomination. There is nothing exciting about her (besides her husband). People have gotten accustomed to the fact that she could be the president and I think that means that the novelty has worn off.

Barack Obama is the flavor of the month but he's peaking too early. He can't be counted out due to his Clintonian speaking skills (something he shares with Edwards) but his executive and general inexperience will do him in. Obama talks a good game- "move beyond democrat and republican my fellow Americans, we owe this to our children... blah blah blah", but the fact remains that he's an old school liberal.

Richardson, Vilsack, and Biden constitute 3 solid tier 2 candidates. Each one should be able to find a niche and raise some dough. Richardson is the most presidential of the 6 candidates that matter. He's also hispanic, electable, and the only Westerner running. Vilsack is a popular governor with solid moderate credentials from a swing state. Being a governor is an asset by itself. Biden (unless Clark runs) is the undisputed national security heavyweight in the contest. As the chairman of the foreign services comittee he may be able exploit the Iraq war like no other democrat. Biden tendency to shoot his mouth increase the chances that he catches fire. Lastly Biden's Iraq Plan- dividing Iraq into 3 countries may make him stand out as a candidate with a plan (and I think a damn good one).

I'll probably give my republican analysis later today seeing as I get my jollies from blogging. Please do leave me some comments.

The Psychology of Congressional Iraq War Decisions/ Are you smart enough to vote?

From www.cnn.com/politics.com : "President Bush Friday accused critics of the Iraq war of distorting the events that led to the U.S. invasion, saying Democrats viewed the same intelligence and came to similar conclusions."

Since I'm the least partisan person you'll ever meet, let me tell you why the Democrats were against the War, even though half of the congressional democrats voted for the resolution:

They were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.

Think about it. Back in the winter/spring of 2003, the Democrats had just gotten their asses handed to them in the November 2002 midterm elections because September 11th made Bush's popularity sky-rocket, and because the Democrtas were seen as "weaker" (i.e, not militaristic enough) on security issues.

Acting as a unified voting block, the Democrats could have stopped a war, that the vast majority of them did not believe was justified, despite their votes. However, they would have looked like pussies. This is one of the reasons why Bush went to war. He put the dems in a lose/lose situation. War, unless you fuck it up, and always in the intitial stages, strengthens the incumbent.

If they stop it, they're cowards. If they collaborate they're accomplises, as Bush is referring to them now.

However, ask yourself this question: would Al Gore have gone to War in Iraq? Did the democrats initiate discussion over the war?

The dems are victims of political cowardice in not voting their conscious. They are not accomplises. It was Bush's War. If you aren't smart to understand the political game that Bush played then you shouldn't be allowed to vote.