Thank you, George Carlin. Say "hi" to Dick Martin and Harvey Korman.

The last month has seen some of my comedy heroes permanently exit the stage.

Every time I saw George Carlin (TV appearances, HBO specials, and movies) the last few years, I wondered how much longer he would be alive and how I would feel when he dies.

And now I know the answers because 1) George Carlin died today, and 2) that makes me feel like shoot (no, that's not a typo).

When I was in fifth grade, I was introduced to George Carlin by my friend Clarke Snell, who had Carlin's "FM & AM" album. As soon as I heard the routine entitled "Shoot," I was hooked. By the way, regarding the use of "shoot," Carlin's line was "They can't fool me, man. 'Shoot' is 'shit' with two o's."

Carlin was a brilliant comedian, but he was an even better social critic and modern-day philosopher. For many, he will always be best known for "The Seven Words You Can Never Say on TV." However, that bit was tame compared to some of his later material, and yet he was always able to talk about controversial topics in a very direct, no-compromise way AND make you think AND make you laugh.

I cannot adequately express my gratitude for what he brought to and added to my life. And while I am sad that Carlin is no longer part of this plane of existence, I am happy for him that in the afterlife there is no FCC.

In addition to Carlin, my sense of humor was shaped by two other people who also recently passed away. Our neighborhood was full of kids, but one night a week all playing outside and in would end right before "Rowan & Martin's Laugh In" came on. That was one show that no one would miss. On May 24, Dick Martin went to meet his co-host Dan Rowan in the great hereafter. Another show that we all watched every week was "The Carol Burnett Show"--undoubtedly one of the best sketch comedy shows in the history of ever. The cast was absolute magic, and that cast included Harvey Korman, who passed away on May 29. But in spite of the his brilliance on "The Carol Burnett Show," my favorite Korman role will always be Hedley Lamarr in "Blazing Saddles."

And to quote Hedley, I say to Carlin, Martin, and Korman that I hope you are all free to forever "do that voodoo that you do so well!"

For McCain, being smart is "not too important."

On June 11, John McCain was interviewed by Matt Lauer on Today. In that intreview, McCain said something that caused a bit of outrage. Here is the video supplied by the McCain campaign of the pertinent part of the interview:






The outrage was caused by the statement that "when American forces can come home from Iraq" is "not too important."

The McCain campaign issued a statement which in part said that

John McCain was asked if he had a "better estimate" for a timeline for withdrawal. As John McCain has always said, that is not as important as conditions on the ground and the recommendations of commanders in the field. Any reasonable person who reads the full transcript would see this[.]

I am willing to accept this explanation, but even with this explanation, there are two reasons why McCain's statements show that he is simply not too bright, to put it mildly.

The first reason is that, like Hillary before him (see this post), McCain should have realized the very obvious fact that the words he chose could easily be interpreted to have a negative meaning. I don't care what the context might be, any time you say that when American troops might be coming home is "not too important," you have said something pretty stupid. This is particularly true when one has recently opposed a bill that would increase benefits to veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan--which McCain did. Given these circumstances, McCain should have known that his choice of words would be viewed in a very negative light. And so I will say the same thing about McCain that I said about Hillary:

No one with any sense would have made these statements. They show stupidity and an utter lack of judgment and ability to realize risks and consequences and assess one's own actions. That's not Presidential material folks.

The second reason is that McCain's explanation is based on fantasy, not fact. As Keith Olbermann put it, "The full context is that the Iraq you (McCain) see, is a figment of your imagination." Recall that McCain was asked if he could provide an estimate for when our troops could come home. Here was his full answer:

No. But that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany.

That’s all fine. American casualties and the ability to withdraw. We will be able to withdraw. General Petraeus is going to tell us in July when he thinks we are. But the key to it is we don’t want any more Americans in harm’s way. And that way they will be safe, and serve our country, and come home with honor and victory — not in defeat, which is what Sen. [Barack] Obama’s proposal would have done. And I’m proud of them, and they’re doing a great job. And we are succeeding. And it’s fascinating that Sen. Obama still doesn’t realize it.

McCain tried to compare the situation in Iraq to present day South Korea, Japan, and Germany. It is certainly true that there are significant numbers of American troops in those countries, BUT none of those countries currently have an ongoing war on their soil. None of those of those countries have a population which is targeting and attacking American troops. Consequently, the situations in those countries in no way are comparable to what our troops face currently in Iraq.

For McCain's spin to make any sense, Iraq would have to become a relatively safe place for Americans AND it would have to stay that way. And anyone who thinks that is likely to happen is just plain delusional. Just look at what has happened in Iraq over the last five years. Things are violent, then things are relatively calm, then things are violent again, and on and on. The only way to achieve stability and relative peace--other than just allowing total civil war and letting things play out--is through a political solution among the three major groups in Iraq (Sunni, Shia, and Kurd). And anyone who thinks that is going to happen anytime soon has some serious reality issues.

And just to be clear, I think McCain has serious reality issues, and I think he is showing stupidity on an issue that is indeed very important.

Hillary--a lesson in kharma

I don't know why this did not occur to me before now, and I am certain many others have already mentioned it...

In my first post about Hillary's campaign, I explained that Hillary had absolutely no connection to New York prior to her decision to try to be a Senator from New York. In that explanation I noted that Hillary was born and raised in the Chicago area.

See, Hillary could have sought a Senate seat in Illinois, her home freakin' state. I have always thought that she could have won such an election in Illinois. Of course, she could not have been a Senator in 2001 if she had run in Illinois (that would have been 2005). However, given that in this campaign she relied far more on her "experience" in the White House than her Senate experience, such a delay (2001 to 2005) might not have made any difference in this campaign. But that's not the point here. The point is that if she had run for Senate in Illinois in 2004, she likely would have easily been the Dem nominee because the Dem primary was full of relative nobodies, including a state legislator by the name of...Barack Obama.

If Hillary had had the patience to run for office in her home state, Obama never would have been elected to the Senate, and thus he never would have run for President in this election.

Instead, Hillary decided to turn her back on her home state and declare herself from New York, and thus Hillary allowed Obama to be in a position to run against her--and win.

...and the big-ass kharmic wheel rolls on.

As of today, my prediction is wrong.

I am watching Hillary's speech, and she has unqualifiedly endorsed Obama and asked her supporters to works as hard to elect him as they worked for her.

I am glad that my prediction was wrong.

She is still talking about her position on some issues and how she will keep working on those, but I don't have a problem with that given her express endorsement of Obama.

She has talked about the Democratic party in general, and now she is talking about Obama.

So far, so good with this speech. Much better than June 3.

I'll keep watching and update as need be...

A Hillary prediction

Wow...been a while, huh? I'll give an explanation regarding my very extended blogging break, but for now, I offer a prediction about Hillary.

A while back I told my sister that within two weeks Hillary would lose it and say something blatantly racist as to why she should be the nominee. Well, I was partially wrong--it happened the very next day when she mentioned the "trend" of white, non-college graduates voting for her instead of Obama. In other words, she said that blue collar white people would not vote for a black man. And don't even try to spin it any other way.

In light of the substantive correctness of my previous prediction, I will make another...

On June 3, Obama obtained enough delegates to put him past the magic number for securing the nomination. And so far, Hillary has flatly refused to concede defeat. My prediction is that not only will she never concede before the Dem convention but that she will lose it and throw a public tantrum. She is going to be set to make a public speech and talk about the party unifying behind Obama, but she simply will not be capable of uttering those words. Instead she will snap and launch into a tirade the likes of which we have never seen.

UPDATE (June 5): Looks like we might know the outcome on Saturday, as Hillary has scheduled a speech for then, according to this announcement.