I MAY BE PREJUDICED BUT I LIKE NEW ENGLAND BEST. Pardon the alleviation in outrage this weekend (you can build your own, easily, out of stories like this one about the human waste products who run credit card companies and the extortionate rate jumps with which they fleece us suckers) but I am visiting editor Martin and his lovely wife Zara in Hanover, NH, and it is hard to feel sour when the air is so fresh, the company so pleasant, and the maple syrup so, well, maply and syrupy (we are just over the Connecticut River from Vermont).

Today we ate in Dartmouth's collegetown, which, like every collegetown, has its busy, beloved diner (Lou's, which was too crowded, alas), its take-the-parents bistro (the Canoe Club, where the steak sandwiches were excellent and the Dartmouth memorabilia inductive of Ivy League pride by proxy), and its general air of boola-boola. We then spent a pleasant hour at the Vermont Institute of Natural Science Nature Center, over by the Quechee Gorge, viewing owls, vultures, hawks, eagles, and falcons. I was amused to learn that the American Bald Eagle sounds in real life rather like a seagull, and that the Red-Tailed Hawk usually does his voice-overs when Old Baldy is serving on TV and film as symbol of our nation's strength. That says a lot, of course, but the birds, the magnificent new facility, and the harsh beauty of the stripped trees and granite outcroppings made even the more poetic kind of political commentary seem rather beside the point.

But of course I haven't been reading the paper, and will soon be back in my urban hellhole, recycling my discontent like an ammunition belt. See ya then!

FROM THE FOLKS WHO BROUGHT YOU "DEFINITION OF 'IS'" JOKES: David Bernstein at the Volokh place:

Kevin Drum writes:

ANTI-SEMITISM....This is getting tiresome. It has long been a staple on the right that most criticism of Israel is really just thinly veiled anti-Semitism. Then after 9/11 we began hearing that criticism of neocons was just thinly veiled anti-Semitism. Now David Bernstein comes along to tell us that use of the term "Likudnik" is just thinly veiled anti-Semitism.

Here's what I actually wrote:

Folks on the Left have been throwing around the term "Likudnik" to refer to any non-left-wing Jew who differs with them on foreign policy, even when the relevant issue has nothing directly to do with Israel, Iraq being exhibit A.... Not surprisingly, the phrase "Likudnik" is gradually becoming a general anti-Semitic term for Jews whose opinions one doesn't like. Case in point, an email from one Matthew Hess...

ANnnnndd... scene.

Here's my question: What the fuck is the difference? Drum says Bernstein says "...use of the term 'Likudnik' is just thinly veiled anti-Semitism." Ah, no no no, says Bernstein, what I said was, "...the phrase 'Likudnik' is gradually becoming a general anti-Semitic term for Jews whose opinions one doesn't like."

Perhaps there is some sort of tool -- a Lawyer's Hairsplitter, say -- that parses this finely enough to reveal a rabbit turd's worth of difference in the meanings. But all that can be revealed by simple sentence analysis (of which I am a master -- no brag, just fact) is that Bernstein said they were getting to anti-Semitism and Drum said Bernstein said they'd already made it. When you're charging anti-Semitism, whether it's the evolving sort or the clear and present sort is not a huge deal.

Bernstein says he wants a "moratorium" on the use of the word Likudnik to describe anything except see paragraph 4 section 10 blah blah blah...

Refresh my memory: Why are lawyers who work for poor people in class action suits evil, and lawyers who write stuff like this heroes?

CRAZY CHICKS ARE ATTRACTIVE, BUT REALLY... On firewatch this morning I discovered Dawn Eden, who is a peach. Like a lot of the cool kids, she plays the fun conservative angle ("After deejaying last night at POP GEAR!, I was dancing with a cute Mod-ish man-about-town..."), but unlike her comrades in rightwing clubland, Dawn's against most forms of sex ("You can say that some people can take sex outside of marriage... I submit that the very act of such emotional separation makes a person less than human") and, as some Bible commentary she wrote at 2:15 in the morning reveals, contraception:

Contraceptives are all "barrier methods," because they put up physical, emotional, and spiritual barriers to the true meaning of the sexual act... God's gift of sexual intimacy is accepted, but His potential corresponding gift of children is not.

She doesn't approve of homosexuals, either ("homosexuality stems from the fact that we live in a fallen world").

But I'll say this for her: at her site we don't have to listen to any phony libertarian bullshit.

CONSERVATIVE CORRECTNESS PART 354,667. Cathy Seipp tells us what the "Red State TV" shows are. She includes "The Simpsons," apparently on the grounds that you can use some of its lines to mock liberals -- which makes sense, since most current conservative commentary boils down to Nelson Muntz's "Ha-Ha!" She also names "King of the Hill" and "Blue Collar TV," shows I like -- maybe I should start positioning myself as a moderate and start hauling in the long green. (Though I really can't stand the animated Life magazine spread "American Dreams," which reveals my recidivist tendency, I guess.)

Elsewhere Ann Althousedecides that because Oliver Stone says his Alexander the Great kisses boys and "may offend some people" (Yer kidding! An Oliver Stone movie that offends people?) he is "trying to lay the foundation for blaming moral-values, red-state Americans for his own embarrassing failure."

Wouldn't life suck if you had to consult the Morning Memo before picking a movie or TV show to watch? Yet some people do it voluntarily, it seems.

WELL, THAT'S A RELIEF. One of our pet themes at alcublog is the egregious characterization by right-wingers of everyone to their left, usually based on unsupportable, self-generated premises (e.g., "the joy has gone out of the left... while the right has been having a gas") or obviously fictional conversations. To head off this sort of thing, Norbizness has kindly offered to speak for the entire Left.

No better man for the job, I say. And he invites you to join the adventure:

I obviously can't be everywhere at once, keying pick-up trucks with "praying Calvin" and "ask me about my kid at Dumpy Willow Christian Academy" decals on them, spewing green tea on veterans as they leave the local VFW hall, and, of course, performing abortions on demand whenever demanded. Quaker in a Basement has bravely volunteered to stand in for me in the Denver area. You'll get your uniform (another area open for discussion) in 6-8 weeks.

I suspect my district is overrepresented as it is, but I encourage those of you with redder constituencies to offer your services.

WE HAVE COME FOR YOUR CHILDREN. The latest redoubt of Stalinist indoctrination, per Naomi Schaefer Riley: The Big Brothers/Big Sisters Program!

...liberals have been transformed of late. And so has the way they interact with children. Now they're language is filled hate and fear, and ultimately a total loss of perspective on the lives we are lucky enough to lead in America... my "little sister," Janice (I've changed her name)... has told me several times that Republicans don't like poor people or black people, that they want to keep them from getting a good education or a decent place to live.

Yes, it's fresh country air and Air America for these inner-city lambkins, who wouldn't feel negatively about Fearless Leader unless evil do-gooders were brainwashing them.

Riley gets extra hilarity points for this: "While I'm guessing that many young conservatives in New York participate in community-service activities through church groups, I have yet to find one at Big Brothers Big Sisters." Well, they felt the same way about WMDs.

PLEASING THE AFFILIATES. "Can anyone point me to a single liberal American columnist who has written about the Theo van Gogh murder? Hitch doesn't count. I've been a bit stunned by the silence. But maybe I've missed some." -- Andrew Sullivan.

Oh, for fuck's sake. OK, I got a free moment:

The murder of Theo van Gogh was despicable. It was an outrage. It was very, very bad. Oy, was it bad. What a bunch of assholes. Fuck those guys. What a bad thing. You should be able to say what you want and not get killed. Jesus. P.S. Islamic fascism sux.

Well, I'll bet that did a lot of good. I don't know what's wrong with the rest of you guys -- you must be fifth columnists or something. I, on the other hand, now have moral stature. And it took so little effort!

HELLO, SUCKERS. Brendan Miniter's latest is the lowest sort of hackwork -- no surprise there -- offering advice to Democrats from their mortal enemies -- no surprise there either -- which includes adopting Republican policies -- damn, Roy, why you writin' 'bout this shit? Well, friends, because one passage would be very astute indeed if only a few of its words were changed:

It's time to let Democrats in on a little secret. America is a land of perpetual rebirth and reform--always has been. That's why George W. Bush gets a pass on whatever he did before he found Jesus and swore off drinking. And it's why Bill Clinton received the benefit of the doubt over his "youthful indiscretions" in 1992. And it is why John Kerry probably would have been given a pass on his anti-Vietnam War activities, if only he could plausibly claim to have seen the error in calling his fellow veterans war criminals and equating America with communist Vietnam.

The words to be changed, of course, are "perpetual rebirth and reform." If the word "suckers" is used in their place, the whole thing makes much more sense.

Set aside that most of what these guys recommend for the Dems is every bit as helpful as what Tweety Bird might suggest to Sylvester. What should be offensive to any Democrat, even a nominal one such as myself, is the very idea that we crave victory so desperately that any avenue to it, including total refutation of any principle whatsoever, would be attractive to us. That they feel so is obvious, but True Sons of Liberty should deal with their attempts to drag us down to their level as a gentleman might deal with the immoral suggestions of a common bounder: a swift brush-off and a word with the constable.

I'm sure there are people in the Party for whom winning is the only thing, because it is their job, God bless 'em. As previously noted, I am absolved of that responsibility, but, all appearances to the contrary, that doesn't mean that I am totally disinterested, nor that I can't see how more people could be turned toward the light in future elections, even without recourse to the tactics of political plug-uglies and cutpurses.

So my proposal would be that every Democrat go to the hinterlands and spread the gospel of critical thinking. I would suggest that we teach these skills to our children (don't leave it to the schools; they aren't equipped for, or inclined toward, such a program), but as we liberals are always having abortions and whatnot, we are understaffed in that regard, and so must extend the blessings of logical analysis, wide reading, and the entertainment of unfamiliar ideas to those outside our families, covens, polyamorous clusters, etc.

As Miniter's modus shows, idiocy is the Republicans' greatest ally. They have discovered that while, as their last good President said, you cannot fool all of the people all of the time, you can fool enough of them to make the effort worthwhile. When we act against them, they simply dangle the appropriate colored ribbons and shiny baubles over the idiot patch, and their voters dance away our hopes. So we must go another way, and diminish their voters' susceptibility to this kind of mind control.

Thus we solve the twin problems of the Party -- an insufficient number of voters, and contempt for the electorate -- at one swoop.

This is missionary work of a sort, but we should pursue it gently and Jesuitically, offering the truth as a gift. Lend a David Sedaris book to an unemployed machinist who thinks his layoff had less to do with multinational malfeasance than with homosexuals. When he asks you why the hell you think that freaky shit is funny, paint a rapturous vision of life with a liberal arts degree. If necessary, mention that literary chicks are easy and someone's always got weed at their parties. He'll come around.

If we all put our shoulders to this wheel, we shall make salons of the TGIFs and Piggy Wigglys, the BPOE chapters will start up book clubs, and Democrats will have a chance even in the reddest of jurisdictions.

If this doesn't work, and the Party and the country wind up not just fucked but ass-fucked thanks to my harebrained idea, at least I'll have established my cred as a political operative and assured myself a spot on CNN News. So long, suckers!

TOOL TIME. Today Michael Totten exhibits the deep thinking skills that make him such an important part of the Bush liberal bloc:

I have never, ever, not once in my life, thought of superheroes as Republicans. Although I guess I can sort of see it now. John Kerry wanted to do many things in office, but saving the world wasn’t one of them. I always thought it was liberals who wanted to save the world, not Texas Republicans, but alas and alack it’s a bizarro world as they say...

The article is about a cartoon and runs to 778 words.

Next week: which ice-cream flavor is more conservative -- Phish Food or Chubby Hubby? Each has countercultural subthemes, yet both celebrate free-market abundance! Maybe Totten can get a thousand words out of that one.

HELL YEAH, WHUT THAT FUNNY-BOY SAID! An interesting variation on a familiar theme at OpinionJournal this weekend: James Q. Wilson joins the chorus of Republican apologists saying the "moral values" thing doesn't mean what the liberals think it means. He is especially hard on Thomas Friedman's fear of Fundies. "Research shows that organizations of Christian fundamentalists are hardly made up of fire-breathers," tut-tuts Wilson, "but rather are organizations whose members practice consensual politics and rely on appeals to widely shared constitutional principles."

Comical as this may be to people who have followed the subject, the big fun really starts in the comments section, where several correspondents refute by example Wilson's point:

I can bet that our all voluntary armed forces great majority of members come from those red states -- truly counties -- and the parents, wives and children of those serving went for Mr. Bush...

...a great reformation is occurring now. It comes to this: Do you believe the Bible and in Christ Jesus--and have a real relationship with Him--and what He taught and stands for, or don't you?... In the parlance, we'd say God is shaking the tree of His church to see which is good fruit and which isn't. And if the church is being shaken, so is America. Americans are being forced--rightly so, in my opinion--to decide: Is there a right way or a wrong way of living and thinking? I base this, of course, on Judeo-Christian teachings and the life of the Christ. So, of course, Mr. Friedman and others lament that "his" America is being ruined. His, the Democrats', liberals' and secularists' comfort zone has been forever invaded and disturbed. They are being confronted uncomfortably and continuously with their moral ambivalence and immorality on things such as abortion and homosexual unions...

When the country watched two hotbeds of off-the-wall liberal areas, San Francisco and Boston endorsed gay marriages and force it down everyone's throats, the country became concerned about the direction of this country....

I think that many people here in Connecticut still trust the TV media and the New York Times. I think that if the MSM had been compelled to present fair and balanced coverage or had real competition many voters would have information they did not have to make an informed decision...

I liked your article and even sent it to my liberal friends who think that Tom Friedman is infallible. The liberal media, however, do determine the final vote... (Really? Then how come we lost? -- Ed.)

My wise sister-in-law said, months before the election, "If God wants George W. Bush to be president, he'll be re-elected, but if God wants our country to be judged, John Kerry will be elected." Perhaps, Mr. Wilson, it is easy to explain the election; it's a "God thing." Very simple, indeed.

I love it. The nicely barbered, degreed, and credentialed conservative mouthpiece clears his throat and demurely states that the GOP is not infested with crack-brained bigots, and the guys in the back row stand up and holler, "Yee-haw! You tell them faggot-lovers, Perfesser!"

CULTURE WARS CONT. The Liberty Film Festival, a place where right-wing filmmakers can show their product and perhaps work out some deals, should be an encouraging development for those of us who believe in the marketplace of ideas. One may imagine that most Hollywood product advances a conservative agenda -- i.e., worship of money, status, and easy answers -- and still welcome the contributions of strong-minded folks who believe themselves to be advancing fresh concepts.

But from this Weekly Standard account, it sounds like another Republican pity party:

LIBERALS WHO FLOCKED to see Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 report that more than the film itself, they were exhilarated by the communal experience of sitting in an auditorium filled with likeminded people who all cheered and booed at the same things. So, too, but in reverse, at the Liberty Film Festival. Attendees loudly jeered whenever a liberal icon such as Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy appeared on-screen, and they energetically applauded every on-screen Republican. "It was thrilling to be in an audience that would applaud when Ed Meese was on the screen," said Douglas Urbanski, a prominent producer and talent manager who appeared on the panel with Breitbart.

"It was very emotional. I had women coming up to me with tears in their eyes," co-organizer Murty told me. "There is an enormous public out there who feel their views have been despised, who've had their patriotism ridiculed," Murty said. "It was such a relief for everybody to have other like-minded individuals to talk to."

Poor conservatives, getting no respect from people they despise! These guys seem more interested in razzing their political opposition (two anti-Michael Moore docs played the Festival) than in actual artistic achievement. I haven't seen these movies, but even the Standard's sympathetic reporter had difficulty praising them ("As for the films themselves, they often seemed an afterthought. Many of them approached their subject-matter from an almost purely rational standpoint, trying to reason with their audience rather than to move them").

By and large conservatives seem to be falling back on their traditional strategy of harshing on works of art made by others. At OpinionJournal, Meghan Cox Gurdon decries the attitude toward abortion in the Alfie remake and in Vera Drake. Though she ends with a prayer for intercession by Mel Gibson, clearly Gurdon doesn't hold out hope for any big anti-abortion epics in the near future. She just wants us to know that our moviemakers are advancing an abortionist agenda.

It may puzzle the rational mind that anyone could believe that a nation which so recently returned right-wing Republicans to power has been brainwashed into fetuscide by a couple of low-grossing movies, but culture warriors have ever been about the counter-intuitive. At the Washington Times, the amusingly-named Christian Toto tells us that Lenny Bruce isn't funny. Now, I have not heard the recent Bruce collection that Toto claims is his only experience of the celebrated comic, and it's possible that judging Bruce by this is like judging Jimi Hendrix by "Crash Landing." And funny is more a matter of taste than just about anything else. But generally if you're going to go out on a limb and tell people that, say, Mozart isn't really so musical, you have to make some kind of case. Toto mainly says that Bruce's "references are dated" and that he was a very bad man ("an opportunist... proclaims his martyrdom, then uses it for marketing purposes"), and that Bruce reminds him of Howard Stern, whom he also dislikes. The summation is that "shock" humor will not last, etc.

One might think this is just a tin-eared review, but Toto's a credentialed culture warrior. Along with WashTimes he writes for the right-wing Insight and The World & I, where he can be seen praising events for Zell Miller and the Media Research Center (Lenny Bruce isn't funny, apparently, but Brent Bozell is a riot), the values-centered and short-lived sitcom "Kristin" ("It's a sad statement that when a sitcom character doesn't lie, cheat or engage in raucous premarital sex, she is treated like a creature from another planet"), the "Singles with Scruples" dating site, and other such approved subjects. (He does turn in some pans, e.g. of Chris Rock, whose "political rants too often skew predictably liberal and lack the incisive bite of his best commentary.") Since the days when John Podhoretz did movie reviews for WashTimes with a little meter indicating how conservatively-correct was each film on offer, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's publication axis has empowered agreeable arts critics to spread the gospel, and we may reasonably read Toto's Bruce review as part of that effort.

They run everything, but as long as someone's making fun of them, even from the grave, they will never rest.

"BENNIE" DON'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE. Things look grim for employees of United Airlines, whose post-bankruptcy plans include this:

United has stated previously that it would most likely be forced to terminate and replace its employee pension plans to obtain the financing needed to exit bankruptcy. United has about USD$4.1 billion in pension funding due over the next five years.

If you feel bad for them, and wish they had the kind of protections workers had in the good old days, readjust your thinking. The Wall Street Journal (the esteemed news-gathering organization, not the froth factory) reports that companies have found a way to retract benefits promised to current retirees years ago:

Many companies have already cut back company-paid health-care coverage for retirees from their salaried staffs. But until recently, employers generally were barred from touching unionized retirees' benefits because they are spelled out in labor contracts. Now, some are taking aggressive steps to pare those benefits as well, including going to court.

In the past two years, employers have sued union retirees across the country. In the suits, they ask judges to rule that no matter what labor contracts say, they have a right to change the benefits. Some companies also argue that contract references to "lifetime" coverage don't mean the lifetime of the retirees, but the life of the labor contract. Since the contracts expired many years ago, the promises, they say, have expired too.

Once the lawsuits are up and running, it only remains for the corporation lawyers (who for some reason have a better reputation these days than trahhhhhl lawyers) to wait for the retirees to give up, run out of money to fight with, or die.

Many of these retirees are skilled, middle-class laborers of the sort that once comprised much of the "Reagan Democrat" bloc. But there is little consolation to be gleaned from the fact that most of those who have cooperated with the dismantling of workers' protections will, eventually, get stung themselves. Because if guys like these aren't protected, even with a contract, eventually none of us will be.

BASEBALL LIKE IT OUGHTA BE. Hell no to video review for baseball.

For one thing, the game's gotten too damn slow already. Bad enough we got guys stepping out of the batter's box and fiddling with their gloves between every pitch. Add two or three breaks per game for umps to watch TV, and ballparks will have to start serving breakfast during the 7th-inning stretch.

Second, umpires are God (or at least Supreme Court justices) or they are nothing. You got to believe that they are standing tall on every call, even when they're wrong (unless one of the associate justices -- I mean line judges -- sets them straight). I don't want to see an umpire sheepishly trudging from the video booth to the first-base line to mumble "Upon further review..." Might as well let the players take swings at them, then.

And there are a dozen other reasons, all boiling down to I'm an old crank and I want players to wear baggy pants and have names like "Cap." Well, not really. But too much tech is too much tech, and baseball's threshold of too-much is lower than that of most other endeavors. Within a few years of this innovation, they'll be playing the game on a giant air-table and hitting the ball with their minds.

Bad enough we got this newfangled designated hitter foolishness.

THEY WILL KNOW WE ARE CHRISTIANS BY OUR LOVE. From alleged mail to the National Review Online:

I agree that Arafat was a bad man, and when I heard he was dying, I was glad. But that fact in itself causes grief: that there would be someone so bad that I would wish him dead. I'm a Christian, and I believe Arafat's in hell right now, and that also makes me sad. He could have chosen differently and he and the world would have
been better off.

I can understand why this guy prefers Arafat dead to Arafat alive. But what's interesting is that he describes himself as a Christian.

Having been raised Catholic, I recall -- and still try to observe, as it makes good moral sense -- the eminently Christian principle that we should not judge any former humans to be in hell, or in heaven for that matter (excepting the saints and the beatified), because to presume to know the mind of God, whose judgement alone settles the matter, challenges our humility before him. (Initial caps on pronouns deleted due to apostasy.)

I realize that Catholicism is the Tiffany of Jesus cults, and that the downmarket variants based in our nation's backwaters may have sloppier standards. Still, how strange that a professed follower of the Prince of Peace would so cravenly offload the responsibilities implicit in an imitation of Christ! Instead, he just feels "sad" that he feels "glad" about the death of a man that was "bad." No idea there that cheering a man's death is something in itself to repent. Did it never occur to him to pray for Arafat's soul?

Even the old National Review, before its thorough debasement in recent years, would put "R.I.P." next to their death notices for people whom they clearly despised. Christian hypocracy? Well, yes, but of the nobler sort. Now they can't even muster that.

There's another little insight into the Values Voters.

THE PERSONAL IS THE POLITICAL, RIGHT-WING VERSION #34,711. Some guy responding to some other guy:

Of all the people I know who support this war, most of us have conversations like this with each other all the time:

"Why are the anti-war people so vicious and nasty?"

"Why are the anti-war people so irrational and hateful and smug?"

"How do we get through to them? They just won't listen!"

"Don't you get tired of being called a liar and a fascist? I sure do."

It reached a point for a lot of us that on election day, we were doing more than just saying "We want to re-elect George Bush." When we pulled that lever for Bush, we were also just plain saying "FUCK YOU!"

Guy also says he takes drugs. Man, I can't wait for the Sixties to be over.

I AM OUT OF TOUCH WITH AMERICA. This is Rene Zellweger after she "packed on the pounds" for the new Bridget Jones movie:



Packed on the pounds? She's fucking adorable.

But what do I know? I like Kim Novak too.

THE WOUND AND THE BALL. The most important high-level appointment of the month is Willie Randolph's. He has solid baseball (and New York baseball) cred, and he's smart, at least in interviews, and God knows all Mets fan welcome him and wish him well. But I can't help but think what might have been.

Former Met Wally Backman was in the hunt, at least fleetingly, and I was really hoping he'd get the job. When he went to the Diamondbacks instead, I was very interested to see what he'd do with them. He'd done well managing in the minors, and came into Arizona announcing that he would not rebuild the fallen D'backs, but win with them. This was classic Backman. He was the sort of player one expected to come into first spikes up: tightly-wound and no backing down. He wasn't generally a great batter or base-stealer, but in the Mets' championship year he hit .320 and he made pitchers nervous with his nervy, glaring, stretch-legged leads. I think he smelled victory and went after it like a hungry tiger. He was 5'9" and skinny and with his mustache and bellicose swagger reminded me of Jack Nicholson in The Last Detail.

Recently the Diamondbacks fired Backman after learning of his trailer-park history: domestic violence, drunk driving, bankruptcy. It may seem odd that his financial problems -- not a crime, at least not yet -- are in that mix until you recall how often the words "role model" come up in professional sports. I doubt very much anyone in the Arizona organization cares very much about Backman's character as such, but they seem to have serious concerns, as everyone seems to these days, about the appearance of impropriety. And so he was let go.

Do I care about his character? The question gives me pause. New York loved Billy Martin, by all accounts a seriously messed up guy -- but one who channeled his demons into baseball (when he was not sending them into his fists and drinking elbow) and won ballgames. Let us not forget that these are jocks we're talking about, and that those guys don't usually draw their inspiration from the same source as lyric poets. When most people do acid and smoke pot, they rhapsodize about trees; Bill "Spaceman" Lee mowed down batters and got into fistfights.

I never wondered before the revelations if Backman went home and belted his wife, and of course I don't approve and hope the anger management classes he had to take made him a less combative helpmeet, not to mention a more careful drinker/driver. But whether or not he's achieved a Phil Jackson sort of Zen enlightenment, I assume he'd still have something left over for baseball, and that in a tight game he'd run out and rip into an umpire over some stupid play in hopes of riling his team to victory. It's worked before, hasn't it?

This, I acknowledge, is a failing in my character. I should be wishing Backman a mellow old age, not casting him as Philoctetes. Baseball does that to me. Politics, too. I'm down for whatever it takes to get my team out the cellar.

GRACIOUS WINNERS DEPT. The Ole Perfesser observes that Maureen Dowd looks "like she's aged ten years" and "bitter." Must be a men's lib thing.

Speaking of chest-beaters, Matt Welch offers a sampling of recent winger hubris. (I suppose he left out some of the more imbecilic ones because, after all, he used to work the same room with the same "anti-idiotarian" schtick. But there'll be a lot of "I was in Switzerland at the time" over the next few years, so I figure why not forget and forgive.)

The baying of the Bushies is mildly amusing, but I'm still more interested in the glib rationalizations of the useful idiots. Michael Totten is still making "The Liberal Case for Bush." I absolutely cannot wait for his "The Liberal Case for Chief Justice Thomas."

Michele Catalano, meanwhile, momentarily turns her considerable nervous energy upon censorship. Her essay includes this nostalgic trope:

And it's not just ultra conservatives who want to shove their values down your throat. It comes from both sides. The PC left wants to obliterate passages from textbooks...

Just as the sight of a Coupe de Ville or a Model T fills my heart with warmth, it's reassuring to know that some simple souls are still fretting about Political Correctness in the Age of Jesusland. Republicans run everything, the MSM is discredited, the blogosphere is triumphant, but somewhere a Marxist is trying to replace "the Founding Fathers" with "the Framers" (and doing it for yucky women's-lib reasons, not good ones like when Robert Bork does it) -- we must be on guard!

Next week: how the atheists are trying to put a giant rock sculpture of "Tropic of Cancer" in the Kings County Courthouse.

BUSH'S BOHOS. I've been hearing a lot of stories lately, here and elsewhere, of hard-working, decent people of cosmopolitan tastes whose votes for Bush I am invited to respect.

These folks read The Onion, they go to the theatre (except when they don't like the director's politics, then they abstain -- hey, I guess my going to see Team America proves that Democrats have no moral center!), they listen to both C&W and indie rock (and would probably refuse to believe that I, an unrepentant Kerry voter, can appreciate and have even played in both C&W and indie rock bands), and all that good stuff.

But they couldn't vote for Kerry because he betrayed the Democrats' "old, Kennedyesque liberal ideals (anti-authoritarianism, tolerance of other Americans)" (while their vote for Bush was a vote "for the ideals that once formed the Democratic party’s base"). And because he demonized the rich, talked about his Vietnam service, etc.

They are full of advice for their ex-comrades, as are their readers, but while the readers' advice tends to be of the fuck-off-and-die variety ("No compromise with a collection of DEFEATISTS headed by Kennedy,Pelosi,Dean,fueled by Michael Moore insanity is acceptable... For one world view to prosper the other must wither and die"), the kinder, gentler Bush voters advise more in sorrow than in anger. In fact, some claim to have "more respect for Kerry than do many of the people who voted for him." (With respect like that, who needs contempt?) But there was all that "shameful hetero-bashing." How can you vote for a guy like that, much as you respect him?

And they allow as how they might vote Democratic sometime if Democrats become more Republican.

They all sound like perfectly reasonable people, and I appreciate the time they've spent telling me how reasonable they are. But my response was written long ago:

Yes, that's very pretty. I heard a story once. As a matter of fact, I've heard a lot of stories in my lifetime. They went along with the sound of a tinny piano playing in the parlor downstairs. "Mister, I met a man once when I was a kid," it'd always begin. Huh. I guess neither one of our stories was very funny.

Typical liberal me, invoking discredited Hollywood morality.

SHORTER JIM LILEKS. New York, I love you more than you'll every know. That is why I compare you to a woman babbling to herself in a public place.

STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES. A very bright commenter to this site says my previous post is "snotty and condescending." Well, she certainly passes the reading comprehension test.

But I must respectfully (yes, I can do things respectfully) push back on this part of her response:

Kevin Drum has a good recent post on the stupidity of indulging in sneers at the expense of people whose votes we'll need next time out. Perhaps, living in NYC, you don't have much contact with any kind of cross-section of Bush voters; the ones you see on TV and quoted in the papers are no doubt selected for their colorful boobishness. Tho' I live in a blue area (SF Bay) I have dealings with many Bush voters, and while some are insufferable, others are fine people (and far from stupid). I don't understand why they vote the way they do; but I think they are reachable. For sure they are not contemptible.

First things first. I was raised in the Outland and know many outlanders. As with most people's generalizations, I here made an unstated but (among literate people, I would think) tacit exception for those people who do not fit the bill. That's why I said the flyover was "mainly... Jesus freaks and neo-Rotarians," rather than exclusively so. I mean, why should Chapel Hill suffer for the rest of North Carolina?

Now, I can understand why some people would want -- no, need -- to figure out why the Bush people voted the way they did. Take, for example, Democratic Party operatives or fans -- people who have faith, people who think that yes, dammit, the system can work. Their goal, and in some cases their livelihood, is to try and get some of those Bush folk to vote Democratic next time.

Snotty condenscension certainly won't work for that. So you have to have sit and talk to them, try to "reach" them, get to know their feelings -- whether in a tavern or in a focus group - to find a way to address their feelings the next time you run a candidate...

...who, if you really want to sway this crowd, will probably resemble Joe Lieberman. Except, of course, for the Jewishness.

Fortunately that ain't my job.

I do know why these guys voted the way they did. They're pissed/scared about gay marriage. They think rampaging deficits, disappearing job security, and an increasingly feudal relationship between boss and worker are all fine so long as Uncle Sam sends them a $300 tax rebate every so often. And they think John Kerry would do a worse job of the War on Whatever than the author of the Iraq catastrophe.

Now, there are all kinds of words you could use for people who think that way, and "Jesus freaks and neo-Rotarians" are among the more polite options. You should really be applauding my restraint.

This isn't a disagreement on political beliefs, this is a disagreement on the direction of up and down and the color of black and white. These people think that the marriage of homosexuals imperils their own marital vows, for Chrissakes. That's not a (harrumph, harrumph) issue on which intelligent people may disagree. That's lunatic bullshit.

And you can't talk that away. Kerry sold out so much on the gay marriage as to closely resemble Bush, and still the yokels waddled into town to vote against him because they knew he didn't mean it -- that he still had a soft spot for them queers. Despite the comical assurances of guys like Michael Totten that the Bush base comprises cosmopolitans such as themselves, anyone who's been paying attention over the past 20 years knows how the term "moral values" translates in this context. (You'll get a more honest assessment from Stanley Kurtz, who has no cool factor to defend, nor any latte-drinking pals to defend it to).

Meanwhile we have guys like the Ole Perfesser telling his congregation that Snarky Carboard Signs in San Francisco = Entire Democratic Party. If I spent the next four years knitting lace doilies for my Republican friends, if we all did, come election time Misha would post a picture of a guy in a gold Speedo holding a BUSH = HITLER sign and all the yahoos would come running again to vote down whatever variant of the gay menace is in fashion that year.

So fuck it. Politics is over this season. I'll just have to settle for the truth.

A HOUSE NEAR THE ZOO. Being a positive sort, I can come up with all sorts of silver linings:

• Inevitable "Who needs stem cells anyway?" article by Perfesser Reynolds.
• Fewer young men competing for jobs and women, thanks to Iran War and related draft.
• Economic collapse finally brings Manhattan rents down to affordable levels.
• Wider Second-Amendement franchise finally allows me the arsenal I need to take a few of the bastards with me during my final rampage.

And so on. While I can't say I'm happy with the results of the election, I'm not shattered. Hope springs eternal, but once you pass a certain emotional age, you learn not to lean on it too hard.

That Rove would roust enough rednecks out of the woods to put Bush over and establish several fag-free zones across the country was always a strong possibility, and when it came to pass it came not as a shock but as an unpleasant reminder that somewhere West of the Hudson there is a large land mass populated mainly by Jesus freaks and neo-Rotarians who are, by some ancient political accident, our fellow-countrymen. We have managed to insulate ourselves from most of their depradations pretty well; though we do have to send them far larger tax revenues than we ever get back, it is all in all a pretty good deal.

Of course, we may have to throw up a few more sandbags twixt them and us when Fred Phelps ascends to the Supreme Court or the Anti-Witchcraft Amendment sails through the new Congress, but let's worry about that later. For now we'll just return to our vantage point and continue taking notes for our natural history of Boobus Americanus. Our predecessor at that task, Mencken, when asked why he remained in a country whose citizens he considered imbeciles, replied, "Why do men go to zoos?" For those of us with functioning frontal lobes, there is always some amusement to be gleaned from even the most desperate of situations, so long as the wild animals are kept in their cages and the home to which we return after a day's entertainment is sufficiently far upwind of the smell.

LET'S GET PARANOID! Start vomiting before you start drinking -- TAPped is posting "voter suppression" updates from around this wonderful country of ours throughout the day. Or you can pick a state and worry about it: Ohio Voter Suppression News will suppress your appetite for sure. And then there's Florida Watch Out -- wait, that's actually a letter from some dude on a road trip to the Sunshine State ("I hope I see some titties!"). Well, that's kind of nauseating too.

And the dogs and hoses haven't even come out yet.

UPDATE. On a lighter note, Suburban Guerrilla is posting some lovely election-day stories. No, I can't vouch for their authenticity. But they are a nice alternative for those of you who are not poised with torches, waiting only for the cry of "Tilden or Blood!" to spring into action.

UPDATE II. I'll be too busy biting my nails. Blog's off till tomorrow. There'll still be plenty of election news then, I'm sure.

YOU KNOW, SOMEDAY THIS WAR'S GOING TO END. As mad as it has all seemed, the real madness starts in a few minutes in Dixville Notch and will continue for, oh, who knows how long.

It is eerie to see all the supers, promos, and ads for toll-free voter help lines, which, circumstances strongly imply, are to be availed when black-sunglassed thugs inform your poll workers, "This man/woman is a felon/illegal alien/Canadian/dead person, have him/her fill out a provisional ballot which will mysteriously turn up in a landfill seven weeks later." Electoral fraud has a long and distinguished history in this country, but I can't remember a time when it was so much and so widely discussed before a national election.

I have some dark thoughts about this, but let us, as they say, give the system a chance and hope that the swarms of lawyers, observers, and operatives out there will mainly serve to intimidate each other rather than voters. I take comfort from this story (found at Atrios) involving some bollocksed Daytona Beach ballots: "When the error was discovered Monday, representatives from both parties were notified. Both sides then witnessed the removal of the ballots and their storage in the vault. The canvassing board will meet Monday to discuss how to recount the ballots."

Which will be accomplished, one hopes, under public scrutiny, with no bourgeois rioters allowed to disrupt the process. If they are, though, we'll all know about it sooner than last time.

The early warnings we've received wrack the nerves, true, but forewarned is forearmed. This time, the whole world is indeed watching.

KEEP GRANDPA AWAY FROM THE KEG. Newsday reports:

[Novelist Tom] Wolfe, known for his trademark white suits, has a new novel out, "I Am Charlotte Simmons," about youthful hedonism on a college campus.

Wolfe said he went to campuses including Stanford, the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill and the University of Florida in Gainesville and attended fraternity parties as part of his research.

"Very few of the students had any idea who I was," he says. "I was so old, and I always wore a necktie -- I must have seemed somewhat odd to them."

I'm sure Wolfe was just taking in the lingo and day-to-day manners, but I would really like to think he was seeking out examples of "youthful hedonism":

"That young lady seems to have passed out. Is one of you going to have non-consensual sex with her?"

"I'm just resting my eyes. Jason, doesn't your grandfather have a hotel room or something?"

"He's not my grandfather! Mr. Wolfe, we're trying to study, please stop bothering us."

"Don't mind me, I'll just take a few more notes and head off to the Hilton. (Pause) Has anyone a dose of Ecstasy?"

"No."

"Ah well. (Pause) That detergent bottle would make an excellent shotgun. Has anyone a bit of weed?"

"No."

"Would you like some?"

SHORTER JIM LILEKS. I show my confidence in the Republican cause by demanding concessions from little children before I give them candy.

ANOTHER MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. Redstate.org was created to effect, according to its mission statement, "the construction of a Republican majority in the United States. We hope to unite serious, innovative, and accomplished voices from government, politics, activism, civil society, and journalism to participate in this work." Let's see what they're up to in the closing days of the 2004 campaign.

"Erick" challenges the ancient myth that the Washington Redskins' pre-election performance decides the fate of the incumbent. "Well, what if the rule tracks with the popular vote winner?" asks Erick. "If so, shouldn't Bush win? After all, Gore won the popular vote last time." He cites Ramesh Ponnuru, and later provides a thoughtful update ("Let's destroy the rule"). He is also cheered by a Bush endorsement from the New York Daily News, which he perhaps believes will deliver our notoriously divided swing state to the President, and muses at great length on the justice of the red vs. blue designation of states. "Given the flirtation of the left with communism, however," says Erick, "I suspect some on the right will think it only fair to make the Dems red." He adds, "If there is something out there you think I need to pick up on, please email me at msnbc-at-erickerickson-dot-org." The temptation is great.

Neil Cavuto recently said on-air that Osama bin Laden was all-but-endorsing Kerry. "California Yankee" approaches the story from this novel angle: "Kerry Campaign Threatens Fox News."

A Democratic operative predicts a Kerry victory "if every vote is allowed to be cast, and every vote is counted," from which Pejman Yousefzadeh infers that Democrats presume "some kind of divine right to be in charge." A commenter adds, with apparent wistfulness, "In most other countries, tanks would roll in the streets to keep Kerry out of the White House."

"streiff" says Kerry isn't a regular guy ("born to privilege," he scoffs -- then, perhaps remembering the pedigree of his own candidate, adding, "and who has assiduously married his way to even more privilege"). He relies for confirmation of his insight on a typically scabrous New York Post article. There is some discussion of an incident in which Kerry's motorcade failed to stop and greet supporters, and the absence or presence of snow on that occasion. It makes for scintillating reading, and if those of you so inclined would be so kind as to fax it to Bush headquarters in Ohio, the President's reelection is all but assured.

Site founder Tacitus has not been seen in several days, and is presumed to monitoring the treatment of Bush/Cheney lawn signs somewhere east of the Brazos.

Thank God the creators of alicublog had the foresight not to promise you folks anything more than a few laughs. Come to think of it, we didn't promise you that, either. Damn, we're really smart.

UNRELIABLE NARRATOR. Today's episode of "My Liberal Friends" comes from Roger L. Simon:

The people had come together through our children -- we were all parents from the same school -- and the kids played in the next room while we ate, drank and talked. Naturally, the subject of the election came up and I decided -- maybe it was the vodka -- to let it rip and say I was voting for Bush. One woman shrieked at the top of her lungs. The others just looked at me in incredulity.

I don't think it's bragging to say I knew more than these people about politics. (I have to -- I am the one putting out opinions in public.) But that didn't stop me from shrieking back at the woman. Others joined in and it became for a few moments a battle of who could yell the loudest. But after a bit it quieted down and they stared at me curiously.

Maybe it was the vodka, though it sounds more like 'shrooms. One also wonders if the dining room furniture was padded.

The Simon report is of course of a piece with other such narratives, and includes the obligatory narrator's assurance that his opponents are all stupid ("Their view of the world was heavily influenced by the Six O'Clock News, a Dan Rather vision of reality" -- why, they've probably never even heard of Mark Steyn!). Still, we might give Simon's more credence than others. It happened in Hollyweird, after all.

IF I HAD KIDS THIS HALLOWEEN... ...well, maybe I wouldn't even. (Hat tip: Dorian.)

SHO' NUFF. Surreptitiously kicking the Stroh's bottles under his couch, Jonah Goldberg offers an alternate explanation for his irrational exuberance:

I can't shake the feeling that one of the reasons Bush might be underpolling is that he's underpolling. Besides from all the technical stuff, I suspect that a small fraction of Americans might be embarrassed to admit that they're voting for Bush. All of Hollywood and elite media say you're a fool or a fascist to vote for Bush. Isn't it possible that a handful of Americans don't want to tell a stranger that they're voting for the candidate all the sophisticates call a cowboy-dunce-warmonger?

"Zebediah! Ole Judge Smoke sez the whole district done gone fer Bush! That means yew musta voted fo' him too."

"Shore did, Clem, an' ah'm plumb glad to hear it, cuz if Skunk Holler goes fer Prezident Bush, the nation is sho' to follow! Yee-haw!"

"But, Zebediah, you-all said you wuz votin' fo' Kerry. Yew tole it to that poll-takin' feller, too, jes' afore we strung him up."

"Ah gotta be honest with you, Clem. I was jes' afeard you-all would think ah was a cowboy-dunce-warmonger."

"Why, Zebediah Beauregard Crump, wherevah did you get such a idear?"

"Wahl, when I went up t' the county seat to get mah young-uns immunizzizzized, they was magazines an' newspapers all ovah the place talkin' 'bout how Prezident Bush was in cahoots with this feller Halley Burton. Now, I lahks Halley Barbour fine, but the way they talked about this here Halley Burton, he seemed a mite oily. An' then ah had some time on mah hands while the young-uns was gettin' immunizzizzized, so went to take in a movin' pitcher, an' it was all about how Prezident Bush was a Ay-rab, an' yew know ah don't lahk them no-how ever since Cousin Zeke come back fum Prezident Bush's Daddy's war all tetched in the haid."

"Wahl, why did you-all vote fo' Prezident Bush then?"

"Shoot, Clem, ah didn't believe them movies an' magazines no-how -- you know ah gits all mah news fum Perfesser Reynolds' website -- but ah started to feel ashamed-like o' mah Prezident, an' ah started havin' dreams where this Frenchman was laughin' at me an' hittin' me with a big loaf a' bread. Ah wuz afraid you-all would think ah was unsophistercated."

"Yuh crazy galoot! Come on, let's cel'brate this heah victory proper, by whaling tar outta some funny-boys!"

(Cue Flatt & Scruggs)

IN CASE OF POTENTIAL DEFEAT, BREAK OUT CULTURE WAR. As the end draws nigh, some conservatives who had heretofore been chest-bumping one another into a frenzy seem suddenly to have absorbed the message that Bush might lose. Alas, this results not in mind-blasts of Zen enlightenment, but in a more paranoid form of magical thinking -- the notion, as one commenter at Roger L. Simon's site put it, that "Kerry has about 30% true believers and should he win, the vote will have been delivered by the MSM."

Yes, the American people, whom conservatives credit with great wisdom whenever the tide is rolling rightward, become, once the tide turns, credulous dopes who cannot even be said to vote, as "the MSM" delivers their votes like so many Domino's pizzas.

I wonder if this idea that votes for Kerry are solely the result of media manipulation will become the countercharge du jour when Dems scream about the inevitable Republican vote fraud on Tuesday: "The votes of Times subscribers must be considered invalid due to media bias."

About the nuttiest such thing I've seen lately is, unsurprisingly, by Stanley Kurtz. In his commentary on the closely-divided state of our nation, he starts with a more-sorrow-than-anger tone: "But what does it say about the changes in this country that the battle is so close?" Yes, the sane reader of any persuasion might mutter sympathetically, yes, things sure have changed; though most of us will start tiptoeing gingerly away as Kurtz denounces "the fact that a candidate who called America’s soldiers war criminals and threw away his metals could get this close" to the Presidency.

What has caused this catastrophic change in the minds and politics of half our citizenry? You guessed it -- The Media! Kurtz tells a long anecdote about the treasonous Sulzbergers. Its relevance is not clear at first -- one guesses Kurtz just likes repeating such stories -- until he heaves this up: "The reason John Kerry and his 'global test' have even a ghost of a chance in this election is because Sulzberger and the folks who thought like him are now in charge of the media–and much of the rest of our culture... That what this election is all about."

One wonders what Kurtz expects from whatever narrow victory Bush might manage to achieve. Because, it would seem, the very fact that so many Americans disagree with the President is what makes it so desperately urgent to Kurtz that agreement -- on his terms -- be reached. So how will that treasonous 49+% be brought back into conformity with basic American values? Kurtz declines to say, but if it thinks it's so important, and that those who oppose the President are just brainwashing victims, one can imagine few methods he couldn't justify.

Winning big makes them insufferable, and winning small makes them paranoid. The only solution is to keep them from winning at all.

SHORTER JIM LILEKS. To all my new readers, a disheartening number of whom have sent abusive emails, I insist that I am a middle-of-the-road Joe who just wants you perverts to stop indoctrinating my widdle girl with your sex-talk, and who is obsessed with Star Trek and other nerd sh*t.

SHORTER JIM LILEKS.My little girl is cute. Now remember, I'm not to blame for the flabby condition of the following statement because I have to watch TV right afterwards: If you liberals had anything to say about it, we woulda lost WWII. Be grateful that I could even find the time for that, folks; 80% of my brain is devoted to deep contemplation of consumer goods. Besides, my heart's not really in it without Glenn around to link me.

Kerry speaks French! Bye!

DERBYSHIRE DOES DIALECT. Negro dialect, at that!

You goin' have nothin' to listen to but Pat Boone an' Merle Haggard, know wha' I'm sayin'? 'Cause they is down on the black man, they is down on the urban youth -- they an' them white record company executives...

This would qualify as a Most Embarrassing Moment, were anyone at National Review Online capable of embarrassment.

INSIDE CRICKET. Christopher Hitchens is a very smart man, but you don't see much of that intelligence turned toward the Bush cause in his ostensible endorsement -- it's really just a column-length nyah-nyah at his old comrades on the Left --

...I can't wait to see President Kerry discover which corporation, aside from Halliburton, should after all have got the contract to reconstruct Iraq's oil industry. I look forward to seeing him eat his Jesse Helms-like words, about the false antithesis between spending money abroad and "at home" (as if this war, sponsored from abroad, hadn't broken out "at home")... I assume that he has already discerned the difference between criticizing the absence of postwar planning and criticizing the presence of an anti-Saddam plan to begin with. I look forward, in other words, to the assumption of his responsibility...

It may at first seem odd that Hitchens has so meticulously envisioned the opposite result of his endorsement as -- very like the result he claims to prefer.

"Anybody But Bush"--and this from those who decry simple-mindedness--is now the only glue binding the radical left to the Democratic Party right. The amazing thing is the literalness with which the mantra is chanted. Anybody? Including Muqtada al-Sadr? The chilling answer is, quite often, yes. This is nihilism....

Why, yes, I suppose it would be. What then might we call an essay calling for the election of a President based on personal pique?

Marketing, I think. Endorsements are supposed to be about moving votes -- especially if there is a pretense of independence (as is routinely made by newspaper editorial boards in October) on the part of the giver; Daschle endorsing Kerry is a bore, but Zell Miller's nod is worth a trip to Madison Square Garden. Yet Hitchens, a well-advertised Own Man, seems thoroughly disinterested in any electoral effect his endorsement might have -- and keenly interested in its effect on his reputation as a maverick. "Myself, I have made my own escape from your self-imposed quandary," Hitchens taunts his old pals in closing. "Believe me when I say that once you have done it, there's no going back... I shall be meeting some of you again, I promise, and the fraternal paw will still be extended."

The set-up is painfully obvious. If Kerry wins, nothing much will change. If Bush wins, ditto. In either case Hitchens will be saying he told us so. A better way to go than in the tow of Tweedledee or that of Tweedledum is out of the question -- "that deep-breath third-party vote... of the sort that has tortured some Nation readers ever since they just couldn't take Humphrey over Nixon" is a sucker's bet, at least in the game Hitchens is playing.

I will say that this should do more for Hitchens' prospects than Andrew Sullivan's version of the outrider schtick will do for his. But like I said, Hitchens is a very smart man.

THE NEW LIBERTARIANISM. "We should rejoice every time we see someone who is voting on ideology, rather than merely supporting the candidate who puts the most money in their pocket." -- Megan McArdle, aka "Jane Galt," at Instapundit.

WHAT I SAW AT THE CORNER. From the wishful thinking department:

RE: DISAPPEARANCE & BLAME: Just thinking out loud, but: If what the Times says is right, isn’t that implicitly an indictment of UNSCOM and further proof that the President was right to remove the monstrous Saddam regime?

See also:

If the American electorate were comprised entirely of teenagers watching Channel One, President Bush would cruise to four more years: In a mock election featuring 1.4 million votes, Bush just crushed Kerry, 55 percent to 40 percent.

Ramesh Ponnuru excerpts 616 words from a Bush speech in four posts and then threatens: "I'll probably do a longer piece for tomorrow's NRO." Ponnuru also thinks it's great that tax cuts have led to Americans working longer and harder than the French. Yeah, I'm sure glad I don't get seven weeks of vacation a year, aren't you? Jonah Goldberg adds, "It is very, very, very hard to fire people even for cause in France." Fuck, can I move there? John J. Miller adds, "...one of the comments I tend to hear from Europeans is that Americans work really hard--the subtext often being that we work too hard don't know how to stop and enjoy life. This is clearly a cultural difference between the United States and Europe..." Might it actually be a cultural difference between Corner writers and people who have to work for a living?

Tim Graham deconstructs the mise en scene of the "Today" Show. Coming soon: Graham on the use of deep focus in Stolen Honor.

And who let her in:

I’m looking for witty sayings to use at the opening of a park in our neighborhood, at which I am running the bake sale. I have styled it a "Bipartisan Bake Sale" and my daughter Molly and I will be baking a hundredweight each of Teresa Kerry's pumpkin spice cookies and Laura Bush's oatmeal chocolate-chunk cookies. Other people are contributing "Swing State Brownies" and suchlike. The bleg is for sayings I can put on the signage. Ones I've already made include: "A nation BITTERLY divided still loves SWEET treats!" and "No UNSIGHTLY chads, just BEAUTIFUL baked goods!" and "Vote EARLY…and OFTEN!" (meaning for the cookies we're making). My husband suggests "NO OIL FOR COOKIES... only butter." Billionairess Biscuits? Conservative Crumpets? Winning entries will make the eve-of-election "Fever Swamp."

I nominate "NRO nutcakes."

SHORTER JIM LILEKS. My Democratic neighbors are all stupid. They don't know about what Bill Maher said, or my computer problems. And you know who else is stupid? The English. Screw them. Sure, I once said that we should abstain from lampooning supercilious Brits because Everything Has Changed, but that's off, because Everything Has Changed Again since I got my 12th cold of the year.

BUT WHAT WAS UP WITH ALL THOSE VOTES FOR PAT BUCHANAN IN BALKH? Congratulations to Hamid Karzai on his recent election to the presidency of Afghanistan. It just goes to show that with some pluck, courage, and the backing of powerful friends, one can accomplish anything. And in nine days, we'll repeat the demonstration!

A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE. I see that Mike Reiss' "Hard Drinkin' Lincoln" is available on web pay-per-view. Trust me, if you need a respite from political October madness, this is the shit. All the episodes are good, but I most highly recommend "The Un-Civil War," in which Lincoln dances around Robert E. Lee chanting "Looooo-ser!" and delivers a stunning rendition of "Dixie" which ends, "You're in graves/with no slaves/Atlanta Braves/really suck!" For proponents of balance, each episode ends with Lincoln being shot by John Wilkes Booth.

THE SEPARATION OF BALLPARK AND STATE. From (where else?) The Corner, the voice of Satan channelled in this case by Den Mother KJL:

Nick Schulz says: "The 'Stros are going to win tonight, on the back of Roger Clemens, who never led the BoSox to glory but did help the Yanks win the World Series. That means Clemens pitches game 3 of their matchup with the Red Sox (winning, natch), and wins game 7 for the Astros -- a Texas team beating a Mass. team right before the election -- and Red Sox nation heads into winter seething at what Clemens did to them -- first with the Yanks, now with the Astros. It's much much sweeter this way!"

Of course, this was written before Clemens tried to prove what an hombre he is by throwing a fastball to Albert Pujols (though, to be fair, maybe Clemens was trying to bean him, and slipped), thus blowing the series for the 'Stros.

Now, I know The Corner is a secure facility with psychiatric nurses on 24-hour guard to see that the contagion does not spread, but it still disgusts me that any American would sully the National Pastime with political bullshit. What kind of example does this set for our children? Can there be no public space where we can collectively give this shit a rest?

Let us lay down the partisan cudgels for a moment and become, not Democrats and Republicans, but fans of the Fuckin' Awesome Hippie Warrior Hell Yeah Stomp Your Hayseed Butts Let's Get Drunk and Riot Red Sox versus Tougher Than You Fucking Long-Hair Sissies Our Reliever is Crazy and Will Beat You with Two Broken Hands and Then Eat Your Heart Cardinals. (Or vice-versa!)

It's bad enough I got right-wing snobs trying to convince me not to laugh at Jon Stewart because nihilism isn't funny. Jesus Christ. Is everything politics for these people? How sad.

SHORTER CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: A vote for Kerry is a vote for a new Holocaust.

(A slightly longer Shorter Krauthammer might read, "I'm totally out of my fucking mind, but I keep beating back the psychiatric inquiries of my editors by accusing other people of being totally out of their fucking minds, and because I'm a shrink they get scared and back off." But I could use that for just about any of Krauthammer's recent columns.)

SHORTER JIM LILEKS. When my wife got canned I howled like a stuck pig, but now I realize it is the destiny of mothers to stay home with their kid for the first six months of its life and whatever intervals of joblessness arise thereafter. This is God's plan; that's why He fires women. Why can't you hippies understand that? Now here's an anecdote about Nazis. You're just like them. Hey, look at this egg.

WHO'S YOUR DADDY? As a Mets fan, I always have a warm personal interest in the Yankees' defeat. The past few years have been rather enjoyable in that regard, but this year's added taste of humiliation ("Greatest Collapse in Baseball History" bawls the New York Post) makes a nice garnish.

Don't get me wrong. I respect the players, especially the most underrated catcher in the majors and the best Yankee shortstop of all time. And though George Steinbrenner is a major hate-object, old age (and perhaps the melancholy knowledge that soon the Devil will come to enforce his contract) has been keeping the bastard's previously insufferable profile mercifully low.

But the fans! Again, don't get me wrong. I know Yankee fans whose loyalty dates back to the Ralph Houk era, and they are noble and knowledgeable connoisseurs of the game and the team. But, especially in the post-season, mostly you get young and youngish chest-thumpers bellowing about destiny and 26 rings, then vomiting on Third Avenue.

Bomber fandom cuts across several demographic groups -- the bodega guys round my way are mostly Yankee fans, and so are many of the mousse-haired, suspender-and-pinstripes yuppie dipshits one sees at wood-panelled drinking establishments midtown, sipping $7 pints and hiding their bald spots under a Yankee cap. But they all have one ignoble thing in common; they can neither win nor lose with grace.

Earlier in this series, their cry was "Who's Your Daddy?" (I heard one local newsreader/hair model say it twice in one sports report.) It should be noted that this plays upon a rare self-deprecating remark made by Boston's Pedro Martinez after the Yankees beat him up earlier this year. Pedro in this instance showed a little class and even rueful honesty, and it is telling that the Yankee fans responded with a giant-foam-fingered froth of bad sportsmanship.

Sore losers are obnoxious, but a sore winner is worse, so I am glad that it falls to the Yankee fans to play the former rather than the latter role.

OCTOBER CLASSICISM. Well, I just saw the Astros use a pitcher to pinch-hit, and the second consecutive walk-off homer of the series. And I only caught the last two (extra) innings. I don't have time to watch the Sox-Yankees game and that's just as well, because I don't think my heart could stand it.

Much else is malformed in modern American life, but post-season baseball is a blessing.

DON'T BE SELF-HATIN'. If you like to read political tea leaves, you can check these out: back in March the irrepressible Pejman was bragging that Jews were leaving the Democrats in droves, and "needless to say, the prospect that Bush may get one-third or more of the Jewish vote in the election must terrify John Kerry in particular."

A lot of that sort of thing has been popping up over the years: how traditional constituencies are being totally demolished, usually to the Republicans' advantage. I think it all has something to do with the internet. (Did you know that in the future there will be no stores?)

Nonetheless there are always those who feel that even the Wave of the Future needs a fluffer, and such like have made much of Kerry's failure to mention Israel in his Convention address, seeing in it a stark reversal not just of electioneering protocol, but also of the Democratic Party's historic commitment to our only (non-occupied-by-us) ally in the Middle East. Some of these folks even claim that Israel needs Bush to be reelected, that in fact "Israel is believed to be the only nation in the world wanting Bush to win." (If we will not be for Bush, who will be for us?)

Well, this watershed, like so many others, seems to have been overestimated at best ("Kerry... is gaining support among Jewish voters as growing numbers disapprove of President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq" -- Washington Post).

What happens to a dream deferred? In the past week Volokh's David Bernstein had not one but two posts wondering why Jews have forsaken Republicans in their hour of need. (His conclusion, taken from a colleague, is that "most Jews are and have actually rationally ignorant about politics and related social issues [sic].")

Well, it's been fun, but after the election, I suspect Republican race-based commentary will go back to its traditional tone and manner.

HEADLINE OF THE MONTH. FOX News has the goods on Kerry: "Kerry Shows Fondness for Quotations." Coming soon: "Kerry Reads Books, Uses Words of More than One Syllable Correctly."

TWO WEEKS NOTICE. Well, we're in the home stretch, boys and girls, and while the blogospheric pressure is predictably intense, for the most part it's pressing on old, long-dead nerves. At redstate they're fretting about the traditional Democratic push for black votes ("race-baiting"), cheering endorsements (in this case that of proven vote-getter Pat Buchanan), and sifting poll results obsessively. At Atrios they're fretting about October Surprises, cheering non-endorsements, and sifting boycott results obsessively.

Meanwhile Bush and Kerry are rampaging through the swing states and trying not to lose their voices or what I'm sure each perceives to be his lead.

Who knows what's in store, but this stage of the endgame seems familiar enough to me that I can hardly get riled by it. That may change, but I hope it doesn't. Operatives are operating feverishly, and God go with ours; somewhere out there voters are being recruited by the barrelful and warned to watch for dirty tricks. But I wouldn't be surprised or displeased if the campaign news remained as content-free as it is feverish (Candidate A ratchets up the rhetoric! Candidate B comes back swinging!) all the way up till election night, at which point all hell, I am sure, will break loose. Till then there is plenty else to do, and plenty of late post-season baseball to lull me to sleep.