"To any of the ladies I’ve offended, I apologize.."

"I say this to the men out there who have never opened a graphic image on the Internet: Don’t vote for me. For those who have, I welcome your vote."

What's your earliest political memory?

Some writers answer that question here. You can answer it here.

What's my answer? Let's see. Maybe, 1960. I was in 4th grade. All the kids I knew were for Nixon. I analyzed the situation and proclaimed: "If kids could vote, Nixon would win by a landslide!"

"The Parallax View."

A famous sequence from the highly esteemed political movie (which you can see tonight, free, at Cinematheque, in Madison):



Glenn Erickson has a lot to say about this part of the film, which constitutes an audition and a psychological test (for Warren Beatty, at his hunkiest).

The Reel Geezers tell you what political films to watch.

ADDED: A quote: "Every political movie about the electoral system shows that it's corrupt." Is that true? And why is it true? My favorite political movie about the electoral system -- that's how the geezers narrow the category for discussion purposes -- is "The War Room," the documentary about the 1992 Clinton campaign. I love rewatching that. (Buy it here.)

Another quote: "Frank Capra was basically a fascist."

"No solution to a problem can be more elegant than the problem itself."

"We are dealing with a very difficult problem. Given the dimensions of the problem, I believe we have done a good job. It includes genuine compromises."

Barney Frank, in praise of the financial bailout deal, spouts some abstract political philosophy. I'm glad they've settled it, if they've settled it, and I hope it works.

But is it true that complicated problems require complicated solutions? Is it true that compromises are the mark of a good plan?

"He showed us that politics do not have to be harsh or overly partisan."

Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle pays tribute to our former governor, Lee Sherman Dreyfus, who died yesterday.

Dreyfus, who had been ill for some time, died Wednesday evening from "respiratory failure relative to a heart issue" at his home in Waukesha, his son Lee Dreyfus Jr. said this morning.

Dreyfus died sometime in the half-hour preceding the 10 o'clock news, his son said. His wife, Joyce, came in to ask him what channel he wanted to watch, and Dreyfus did not respond.

Art is right wing.

From time to time, I write something here that gets a rise out of people. One was:

To be a great artist is inherently right wing. A great artist like Dylan or Picasso may have some superficial, naive, lefty things to say, but underneath, where it counts, there is a strong individual, taking responsibility for his place in the world and focusing on that.

Witness the outcry.

So I was pleased to see a piece in The Guardian titled "Modern art is rightwing" (via Memeorandum). The author, Ed Vaizey, a Tory MP, argues the point this way:

Contemporary art is highly individualistic. It is about freedom of expression, the chance to make one's mark and to speak with a distinctive voice - all characteristics of the right, rather than the left. Contemporary artists are entrepreneurs in every sense of the word....

Contemporary artists are busy making money, just like any other capitalist in Britain, or the developed world, today. The contemporary art market is just that, a market where people invest and even people like Hugh Grant can make money....

More controversially, perhaps, contemporary British art is not engaged, in my view, in contemporary political debate....

Let's fight about it all over again!

UPDATE: And this?

[The new 75-story tower designed by the architect Jean Nouvel for a site next to the Museum of Modern Art in Midtown] is the result of a Byzantine real estate deal...

For some, the appearance of yet another luxury tower stamped with the museum’s imprimatur will induce wincing.

It's quite gorgeous.

"Giuliani and religious right meet on the road to political adulthood."

Writes Daniel Henniger in the Wall Street Journal:

Call me old-fashioned, but I think governing philosophy is more important than the endless Chinese puzzle of moving this or that issue forward and back. American politics, right and left, has become obsessive about nailing where candidates "stand" on standalone issues--abortion, gay marriage, immigration, the North Pole melting or pulling out of Iraq. Trying to pin politicians down is honest work. But last time I looked, the thing you win was still called a "government." That means it matters if the candidate is able to govern, which has proven a challenge the past 16 years or so, in part because proliferating factions refuse to be governed.

In the '60s, the left introduced the "non-negotiable demand" into our politics. It's still with us. It's political infantilism. In real life, the non-negotiable "demand" usually ends about age six.

So, has Giuliani really done anything more than to tell the social conservatives that he can't agree with them on all their issues but that they ought to want him anyway? Are 60s lefties really to blame for one-issue voting? And if we really got into thinking about maturity and infantilism in American politics, which candidate would we gravitate toward? Giuliani?

IN THE COMMENTS: Madison Man: "That damn left! If only everyone was mature like the right!"

"When you say Wisconsin, people most often think of the Green Bay Packers, cheeseheads, beer and cold weather."

Does Wisconsin need rebranding? Apparently, the Wisconsin "brand" ranks 37th among states. States that rank higher: Kansas, Rhode Island, Minnesota, New Hampshire, West Virginia, and Utah. New Jersey is 50th. (Even after "The Sopranos"?) California ranked first, of course.

How would you bolster the Wisconsin brand? And are all the states supposed to get into a big competition to have the most lustrous brand? I guess it's good federalism for the states to compete this way, by making you think well of them. Federalism and advertising — they go together under the heading "American" (even as Packers and beer go together under the heading "Wisconsin").

"What politics has become requires a level of tolerance for triviality and artifice and nonsense that I have found in short supply."

Let's talk about this quote. There are so many subtopics here. Let me delineate a few:

1. First, to understand this quote, you need to realize that the speaker means "that I have found in short supply" in myself. What sort of person talks like this when making a point like this?

2. What sort of person decides to make this particular point when addressing the subject of whether he belongs in politics?

3. Did you have any trouble guessing who said this?

4. Does politics today involve all that much triviality and artifice?

5. Was there some earlier Golden Age, when politics did not involve so much triviality and artifice?

6. What sort of person admires someone precisely for being the kind of person who makes that point and talks like that?

7. Who do you like better: a. Someone who says things like that quote, b. Someone who admires someone who says things like that quote, c. Someone who would only accidentally talk like that and would immediately mock himself for doing so, d. Someone who prefers to look for people who say things like that or admire people who say things like that and then to immediately mock them in writing and provide a place for you to join the mockery?

8. Why is the love I bear for Al Gore so conflicted?

9. Did #8 make you think of Manbearpig?

10. Who does 9 questions? There must be 10.

"Si te gusta el sexo oral, vote por Caragol por consejal."

("If you like oral sex, vote Caragol for council.") Just some political slogan in Hialeah, Florida, which the Miami Herald informs us is "no laughing matter." The Miami Herald isn't going to tell me when to laugh.

"People want to give it a negative interpretation, but anyone who knows me and my way of being knows that I didn't mean for the comment to degrade or offend anyone,'' [Jose "Pepe" Caragol told The Miami Herald.

"My way of being" — I love that. I'm going to use that. Anyone who knows my way of being knows....

Caragol's opponent, Mercy Dominguez, wants us to know "that as a mother and a woman she finds the phrase offensive."

Caragol is quick to note that Dominguez did not point out the rest of the zingers he dished out at the Seguro Que Yes! taping.

''I also said that I was the only V-I-P councilman appointed to the board,'' Caragol said. "Viejo, impotente, y presumido -- old, impotent, and vain.''

For now, Caragol says he'll be sticking to a new campaign slogan -- "Olvídese del colesterol, y vote por Caragol'' -- "Forget the cholesterol and vote for Caragol.''

The man is an irrepressible poet. The woman is a dreary scold. Life goes on.

"It strikes me as a self-hurt book."

Jon Stewart assails Chris Matthews about his book that tries to get you to use political strategies to succeed in your personal life.

ADDED: Here's the video. (I took down the YouTube version that became unavailable.)

Clarence Thomas on Ayn Rand.

From page 62 of "My Grandfather's Son," in the chapter about law school and his ideological shift from left-wing radicalism to conservatism:

It was around this time that I read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Rand preached a philosophy of radical individualism that she called Objectivism. While I didn't fully accept its tenets, her vision of the world made more sense to me that that of my left-wing friends. "Do your own thing" was their motto, but now I saw that the individualism implicit in that phrase was superficial and strictly limited. They thought, for instance, that it was going too far for a black man to do his thing by breaking with radical politics, which was what I now longed to do. I never went along with the militant separatism of the Black Muslims, but I admired their determination to "do for self, brother," as well as their discipline and dignity. That was Daddy's way. He knew that to be truly free and participate fully in American life, poor blacks had to have the tools to do for themselves. This was the direction in which my political thinking was moving as my time at Holy Cross drew to an end. The question was how much courage I could muster up to express my individuality. What I wanted was for everyone -- the government, the racists, the activists, the students, even Daddy -- to leave me alone so that I could finally start thinking for myself.

Oh, no! From the air the Navy building looks like a swastika!

So... do you want to spend $600,000 to soften the edges with trees and stuff?

The building has been around since the 60s, but no one noticed until the advent of Google Earth.

(Via Metafilter.)

"Stop bitching and start a revolution."

Washington views.

"'Atlas Shrugged' is a celebration of life and happiness."

"Justice is unrelenting. Creative individuals and undeviating purpose and rationality achieve joy and fulfillment. Parasites who persistently avoid either purpose or reason perish as they should."

So wrote Alan Greenspan in a letter to the editor of the NYT in 1957, the year the book was published and denounced by the newspaper as "written out of hate."

Let's think more deeply about the meaning of carrots.

We've been talking a lot about carrots and onions, and I've had to interact with various on-line politicos who may hate me for political reasons but may also suffer from a kind of art-deafness. Why are they so into politics? I'm not. I'm an outsider to their game. I went to art school. Sometimes I think it's like talking about color to someone who's color blind or melody to someone who's tone deaf. They encounter someone with a more artistic take on the political landscape, and they can only think to say "you're crazy." What can I do to help?

Well, the artist Evan Izer has been reading my posts, and he sent me these photographs of some of his artworks (and gave me permission to display them here).

1. "Sliced."




2. "Double-Ended."




3. "Cake."



4. "Frozen Box."



Think about it. Let me know if it helps.

"Do you believe that President Bush intends to merge the United States with Canada and Mexico in order to form a North American Union?"

Wacky question on the Right Wing News survey of right-wing bloggers. So did anyone say "yes"? Why, yes! 6%!

Can we "laugh at the bland, super-nice 'Up-With-People' vibe of Romney's cultural Mormonism"?

Andrew Sullivan says "it's going to be a long campaign" if we can't. I'm all for mixing personal remarks in with political analysis, and I agree with Sullivan's implication: The superficial look of things contains meaning that directly relates to the political debate.

But Sullivan is pushing the envelope in trying to legitimate criticizing people because of their religion. He seems to think that putting the word "cultural" in front of the name of a religion makes it acceptable: Once religion crosses the line from the purely religious and becomes part of the motivation for achieving various political goals, we've got to be able to criticize.

I agree that we shouldn't hang back and act respectful simply because it's religion. But anyone who takes the route and brings up religion in a political discussion invites scrutiny. Surely, he has legitimated the subject of whether he is bigoted against a religious group.

"There are two or three societal trends that are driving us in an increasingly deep center-right posture."

From a big New Yorker article (about how badly the Republicans are doing):

[Karl] Rove thinks that more voters now are being influenced by technology and religion. “There are two or three societal trends that are driving us in an increasingly deep center-right posture,” he said. “One of them is the power of the computer chip. Do you know how many people’s principal source of income is eBay? Seven hundred thousand.” He went on, “So the power of the computer has made it possible for people to gain greater control over their lives. It’s given people a greater chance to run their own business, become a sole proprietor or an entrepreneur. As a result, it has made us more market-oriented, and that equals making you more center-right in your politics.” As for spirituality, Rove said, “As baby boomers age and as they’re succeeded by the post-baby-boom generation, within both of those generations there’s something going on spiritually—people saying it’s not all about materialism, it’s not all about the pursuit of material things. If you look at the traditional mainstream denominations, they’re flat, but what’s growing inside those denominations, and what’s growing outside those denominations, is churches that are filling this spiritual need, that are replacing sterility with something vibrant, something that speaks to the heart of the individual, that gives a sense of purpose.” Rove believes what he has always believed: that the Christian right and, to a lesser extent, tax- and regulation-averse businessmen will continue to assure Republican victories.