Hussein calls Bush out.

Did you see that? Unbelievable. On CBS last night, with the aid of Dan Rather, the president of Iraq challenged the president of the United States to a debate. A live, televised via satellite throwdown. Hussein said we can go man-to-man, pardner. Heads up. You ask me some questions, and I’ll ask you some questions. You explain why you want to go to war, and I’ll explain why I want peace. In front of the whole world. Uncut. Uncensored. Straight up.

What was Bush’s response? According to CBS, the White House said no way, Jose. They said Hussein wasn’t serious. Is that the sound of chickens clucking?

Okay, seriously, if I were the president, I wouldn’t take Hussein serious either. Joining that guy in a debate puts him on an equal level, something that he is not. Or is he?

It is very hard for a human rights loving country like ourselves to argue that another human being is not worthy of being debated, especially when the topic is something as important as national sovereignty. Yes, it can be argued that Saddam Hussein’s heinous actions against the Kuwaitis and his own people disqualify him from being considered an honorable opponent worth of debate, and that’s my point. But that’s not what the White House said…at least yet. So far, the spin controllers haven’t done their job.

Like I said, if I were president, I wouldn’t honor Hussein with a debate. But I’m not president, and I would find a Bush-Hussein debate fascinating. I’d love to see it happen, mostly because I don’t think Bush would win. Mostly because Bush is crappy when talking off the top of his head. But also because the real U.S. policy towards Iraq is secret, and all the posturing over Weapons of Mass Destruction and aiding terrorists is a smokescreen designed to placate an American public that’s still touchy over the events of 9/11. Bush knows this, Hussien knows this, and THAT’S why there’ll be no debate about it. Hussein would ask too many questions that Bush won’t be able to answer.

One thing is certain: if anyone ever thought Hussein was stupid, they have been emphatically proven wrong. He may be a murderous, lying, out-for-himself dictator, but he made Bush look like the cowardly warmonger. Yikes.

More later…
Paul

When is a War not a War?

Back in the '80's, then-President Ronald Reagan stood before the White House press corps and said the following: "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I have just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."

It turns out that ol' Dutch was just joshing, but what he didn't know was that the microphones were turned on, and somebody recorded the whole thing. That quote was later sampled by an enterprising dance music producer, syncopated with some hi-energy techno funk, and released as a reasonably successful dance hit. A classic example of making a silk purse from a sow's ear.

So that was the light-hearted section of today's entry.

I just read an Associated Press article that said US warplanes have been bombing Iraqi military communications installations, and that we have conducted at least 4 bombing raids over the past two days.

Does that mean the war has already started? I cannot imagine that if any Western country had another nation's warplanes fly over and intentionally bomb military installations that that country would not consider itself to have been attacked. Yet in that very same article (which is titled "Bush Mocks Saddam on Weapons Disclosure"), it says that the U.S.-British-Spanish resolution is "…seeking U.N. authorization for War", while the French-Germans-Russians have a proposal on the table to continue weapons inspections at least into July.

Might not be much left to inspect by July, if we continue bombing runs.

What does all this mean, really? I think it means that we, the American people, have NO IDEA what the heck is going on over there, and we probably won't find out until years after the fact. Son of Bush brings us Son of Operation Desert Storm: The Big Payback. Somebody oughta make a dance record out of it.

More later…
Paul

The Gangs of New York.

Martin Scorcese is a great filmmaker. A GREAT filmmaker. So why is "Gangs" such a crappy movie? As an example of the filmmaking art, it is incredible: the period costumes and art direction are perfect, the craft of cinematography is stunning, and the movie successfully conveys the look and feel of 19th century New York City, a veritable battle zone between the so-called "Native Americans" (no, they're not Indians) and the newly immigrated Irish.

But the story? What the heck is this thing about, really? Is it a revenge drama, the story of a young boy (Leonardo DiCaprio) who, after watching his father die in a skirmish at the hands of Bill "The Butcher" (Daniel Day-Lewis), grows up to avenge his father's death? Or is it about the mean times that these folks lived in, and the ethnic tensions that engulf the entire city?

Well, hell, at least there were some fine performances. Liam Neeson played Qui-Gon, er, "Priest", who was Leo's father. I mention his "Star Wars: Phantom Menace" character because it was pretty similar to Priest….ol' Liam is getting pretty good at playing these wonderful father-figures who get killed by the bad guy early in the film. I think he even used the same accent in both films! In the opening scene, he gives young Leo (no, I don't remember his character's name, and you won't either) a lesson about shaving…or was that a lesson about cutting oneself? It's hard to say, because it didn't have any bearing on anything else that happened in the movie. What was the lesson? "Leave the blood on the blade." Right then you knew he wasn't a butcher…or at least you hoped he wasn't.

Daniel Day-Lewis absolutely CRUSHED his character, a murderous butcher who was also the de facto boss of the slum they all shared. In fact, he is the only good thing about the whole movie…he stole every scene he was in, and a few that he wasn't. I hear that Cameron Diaz was in this film, too, but I don't remember seeing…oh wait, was she that mousy, mouthy chick with the tummy scars? Talk about forgettable…I still haven't figured out what her character added to the story, other than give Leo a pseudo-romantic interest, and perhaps another recognizable name on the poster.

My guess is that Scorcese loves his town of New York so much that he even wanted to explore and expose this particularly sad chapter in the history of the city. What he shows us in the movie is rampant crime and corruption, terribly unsanitary living conditions, wretched poverty and unabashed hatred….and the thought that kept running through my mind is that not much has changed since then. I'm pretty sure that was at least one of the points Scorcese was trying to make. My only question is why? Seeing this movie made me want to go out and rent "Age of Innocence", just to console myself with one of his better films. "The Gangs of New York" is cinema as emotional punishment, not enlightenment.

More later…
Paul

Breaking down War.

These are strange times we live in. We have moved from a "potential" war with Iraq, to a "probable" war, the stated reason being that Iraq's dictator has lied about stockpiling so-called "weapons of mass destruction", thereby violating any number of UN resolutions and agreements.

But we really need to be clear. We cannot afford to fool ourselves about this, or any war. War simply means killing other people to take their shit.

Now, a lot of money has been spent, and television airtime wasted, to dress up war and make it appear to be some sort of valiant undertaking. However, that doesn't change the reality of war, which again, simply means killing other people to take their shit.

How did Operation Desert Storm get started? Iraq sent its troops into Kuwait, killing people and taking their shit. In response, we sent OUR troops over to kill Iraqi people and take THEIR shit.

Hitler kicked off WWII by killing a lot of people and trying to take EVERYBODY'S shit.

Some will argue that defensive actions can be justified, such as our taking on Hitler and Hussein. Well, justification notwithstanding, the reality of war doesn't change: we killed a bunch of Germans and Japanese and Italians and took their shit. And that's what we plan to do in Iraq this time around.

When will we (and by we, I mean the entire human race) EVER learn that killing people and taking their shit NEVER SOLVES ANYTHING? Here in America, we have amassed the world's most powerful army supposedly to defend our American way of life. We've got more and better guns, missiles, tanks, ships, submarines and jets than anybody. Our armed forces were built not to take offensive actions against other countries, but to deter aggressors and defend our Nation. That's wonderful, but the only problem is that the method to do this is to kill other people and take their shit.

The old saying still holds true: If you live by the sword, you'll die by the sword. Is that what we really want for our children?

More later…
Paul

The Michael Jordan Conspiracy.

Yesterday I watched the 2003 NBA All-Star game, broadcast from Atlanta by the TNT network. Now, I'm not the biggest basketball fan in the world…in fact, I fairly suck at the game, but I like watching it and I'm very appreciative of the artistry displayed by the phenomenal athletes of the NBA. I was watching the game with some diehard B-ball boys, and I was quite surprised at the disdain these guys had for Michael Jordan, the undisputed King of Basketball.

My co-watchers were making constant sarcastic comments about Jordan; his age, his diminished abilities, his many "retirements". Most telling, though, was their conviction that the NBA was pulling strings to make sure Jordan achieved three major accomplishments in what was to be his last-ever All Star game: First, he would break Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's all-time All Star scoring record. Second, he would score the last basket to win the game in the final seconds. And finally, he would win the MVP title. The hat trick, as it were.

My friends were convinced that the fix was in. And judging by the number of times they ran that "triple Jordan" commercial during the breaks, it seemed that they had a point. But Michael was struggling. He missed his first seven (!) shots, and had to really work to score 20 points. The scoring record was his. But his shot was so off that he missed his final shot in regulation, and the game went into overtime.

The score remained tight throughout the overtime period, and with about 5 seconds left on the clock, Jordan went up for a jumper and scored what should have been the winning two points. But just a second or so later, one of his teammates committed an idiotic foul on Kobe Bryant while he was attempting a 3-pointer. Kobe made two of three free throws to tie the game again. Now, if there REALLY were a conspiracy, Kobe would have missed all of his free throws, right? Well, Kobe told reporters after the game that "he had a job to do" but he did think about just giving it to Michael. Hmmph.

So the game went into DOUBLE overtime, the first time in history that an All-Star game has taken so long to decide. Unfortunately for the Jordan cabal, their man did not come out to play the entire period. At this point, the West All-Stars had seen enough, and decided to put the game away for good. Final score: 155-145.

Jordan did NOT shoot the game winner. Jordan did NOT win the MVP trophy. If there was indeed a "Michael Jordan conspiracy", it failed. But let there be no doubt who left Atlanta last night STILL the richest, most well-known professional basketball player in the world. Need I say his name?

More later…
Paul

Saturday, February 1, 2003....ouch

It was a normal morning around the McDaniel house in the Dallas suburbs. My wife was out and about, my daughter had a chocolate milk mustache, and I was lying on the couch watching her...watch cartoons. Then my windows shook and my alarm on my car went off. It sounded like the whole block fell into a sink hole." What the heck" I muttered? My daughter took another drink of chocolate milk and I surveyed our property. Everything seemed in order. Like I have said before, we live in the most boring neighborhood in all of America. I found nothing unusual.

So I took back to my perch on the couch and watched my daughter giggle and mimic the television. As soon as a commercial came on, I turned the channel to check the days weather so I could decide if I was going to moto practice that afternoon at Mosier Valley. Needless to say, my attention was deverted from the days weather and my daughter....to one of complete horror.

My heart ripped as our local Dallas/Ft. Worth channels kept showing the Space Shuttle Columbia shred into pieces just 40 miles above my house. At first I didn't even realize it had broken apart in Texas, or over the Dallas area. I didn't put the two together, that they were showing footage shot by our own TV crews? Then it dawned on me! I was horrified, saddened and confused. I thought, " Oh Lord not again, I just remember sitting in Mrs. Deputy's 8th grade Algebra class watching the Challenger explosion like it was yesterday". As the morning progressed, I realized that I had heard the sonic boom that the doomed Columbia had delivered as it dove into the atmosphere at 12, 500 mph. Even at that point, I was hoping against all hope, science, logic, common sense, that somehow the 7 astronauts were able to eject. You just don't like to automatically think the worst, even though in the back of your mind you know that to be the case.

As the morning turned into noon, I was glued to the TV. I cried and sobbed as the reports kept coming in, each one more bleak than the last. People were already finding debris in their front lawns, and Air Force helicopters were flying overhead all day. The electronic highway signs read, " Please report all Shuttle Debris to the local authorites". That was very surreal. It's a funny thing living here in Texas, we are all very close to the Space program. Nasa itself is only a 3.5 hour drive from my house. It was just very sad.

I soon realized that out of the seven astronauts, 6 of them were married, and 5 had children. That is when I put myself in their shoes for those last horrific 90 seconds when they realized that they were doomed, and there wasn't one damn thing they could do about it. They were all eager to get home and see their families. Can you imagine your last 90 seconds on earth? Can you imagine looking out of the window of your spacecraft and see the left wing fall off? At that point, you know that you just died. You have 90 seconds to reflect on your past, even though you don't because you are in a panic mode. You have 90 seconds to scream, hold your breath, close your eyes, squeeze your cockpit seat. 90 seconds of pure hell. Pure hell.

Knowing that, we also know that each of these heros are very well aware of the risks they take. They are strapped to an experimental, rocket powered aircraft with 28 missions under her belt. A Southwest Airlines 737 does 28 flights every 2 days. These astronauts are very special people. They are hands down some of the brightest minds in the world, doing a job that not many people have the drive to do. I guess for an astronaut, going out in a ball of flames at 17 times the speed of sound is just about the way they would want it. That is what I tell myself anyway.

I pray for the families and for their kids. None of these astronauts will ever be able to get up on Saturday morning and drink chocolate milk with their kids again. But on the other hand, their kids know that their parents were some of the most elite, heroic people in the world. It's a trade off, but only at a different level that someone like myself could never understand.

God bless the Columbia crew, their families, and God Speed to all of them.

Now then let's fix the problem and get our asses right back up there and continue what these wonderful people were doing...... moving forward.