Andrew Hamm: the Bipolar Express

Ruminations on theatre, music, and just about anything else that crosses my bipolar brain.

Saturday, June 16, 2007

Explain My Dream to Me

Here's my dream from last night.

I'm walking on a path through the woods. It's a lovely day, sunny and warm, in a very nice park-like section of cheery woodland. On the path in front of me I see Hillary Clinton in a nice track suit half-walking half-jogging towards me. She is being pursued by a dimetrodon. I ask the Senator why she isn't running for her life. She explains that the dimetrodon is not very fast and that she is in no danger at her present pace. I look down the path and see that Mrs. Clinton is correct; the dimetrodon waddles at a pretty good clip, but it is easy to stay ahead of it.

I walk down a parallel path, tracking the progress of the dimetrodon as it chases the former First Lady. That's when I realize that the sail-finned pelycosaur is approaching a larger group of people down the path. While Hillary Clinton can be trusted to defend herself, not all the people picnicking in the woods are so resourceful. It's clearly time to act.

I rush up next to the dimetrodon and wrap my arms around its body. How I manage to encircle its three-foot-tall, rigid sail is, as Shakespeare would say, "the stuff dreams are made of." Using my super strength, I lift it off the ground. Naturally, the solution is to fly it back to where it came from, so I take to the air.

The dimetrodon, understandably concerned at being hoisted off the ground and flown away, especially with such a delectable Democrat just a few feet down the path, expresses its anger by biting my left hand. I am invincible, of course, and my skin cannot be pierced by the creature's teeth, but it hurts all the same. To discourage the animal from biting me further, I sink my own teeth into its right shoulder--just enough to warn, not to draw blood. Because that would be weird and gross, tasting the blood of a living mammal-like-reptile from the Permian Period. Surprised and chastened, the dimetrodon stops biting me.

That's when I woke up.

So I invite you, gentle readers, to interpret. What does my dream mean? Is it some kind of subconscious psychoanalysis? Is it prophecy, portending future events? Of is my childhood paleontological geekdom just colliding with my adult superhero geekdom with a side order of political paranoia?

This is what a dimetrodon looks like, in case you don't know:

And this is what Hillary Clinton looks like:

Which is scarier? You decide!

Labels: , , ,


  • At 6/16/2007 12:56 PM , Blogger Frank Creasy said...

    First of all, Hillary is by FAR scarier. Second, although I've not gone back to research this (should be easy with Google or Wikipedia), if memory serves correctly, Dimetrodon was an herbivore. Had she been pursued by, say, an Allosaurus, THAT would have made sense.

    But what does the dream MEAN? I'll take a stab at it: Hillary is the Democratic front-runner, setting a pace based on what she would consider "new liberalism" apart from the Democratic dinosaurs she's easily distanced herself from in the race. Though they APPEAR threatening, like Dimetrodon, they have no teeth to attack, and therefore can't penetrate conservative strongholds to attract voters such as Andrew Hamm, who are invulnerable to their soliciations. They may, however, have some influence over the herd of sheep represented by the group of Democrats and fence-sitters represented in your dream as group needing rescue from Dimetrodon...prompting you to take Dimetrodon out of area. Doing so represents your attempt to espouse timeless values threatened by liberal Dems, represented in your dream by Dimetrodon.

    Hillary's new liberalism will woo some of that group, but not enough to overcome centrist Republicans such as Rudy Guiliani or even a Fred Thompson.

    Your dream is about the outcome of the 2008 election. Hard fought, bitter, but ultimately a Republican in the White House again.

    Okay, that's my guess. The peanut gallery can have at it - this is just my guess, I'm not going to engage in a debate. After all, it's a dream.

    "All we see or seem is but a dream within a dream." - E.A. Poe

  • At 6/16/2007 7:34 PM , Blogger Joey Fanelli said...

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  • At 6/16/2007 7:36 PM , Blogger Joey Fanelli said...

    It's my belief (this may already be a widely accepted belief, it seems like it should be, I'm really not sure though) that the subconscious is composed of many different complex layers. I also believe that (once again, this may also already be widely accepted) in a dream state, these layers can often mix together and form incoherent messages. That's why dreams are so hard to understand, because they are composed of an assortment of completely unrelated messages.

    So this dream may just be a mixture of some of the different layers in your subconscious. I remember once in class, you said something about how when you were a kid, you wanted to be a paleontologist, so that may be where the dimetrodon comes from. You are also one of political insight, and with the primaries coming up, politics have probably buzzing around in your mind, expessialy your subconscious. You also have a deep and natural desire to help people, which explains you trying to take the dimetrodon out.

    Dreams, I think, rarely ever mean one thing. In fact, a lot of the time they probably don't mean anything. The concept of dreams is probably a lot simpler than we want to believe, but I doubt we'll ever understand them.

    Nice dream, by the way.

  • At 6/17/2007 12:03 AM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    I don't think Andrew's biting into the Dimetrodon represents his attempt to simply "espouse timeless values threatened by liberal Dems," (First off, I take a major exception to that statement, but I'll get to that in a minute) Rather, I think it means he's looking out for all viewpoints and wanting to protect something. he sees something is wrong that others don't. Could be the threat of Islamic terrorism (Ancient, extinct and irrelevant yet dangerous extremist Islamic dogma terrorizing the rational population of peaceful picnic people; moving ploddingly along, yet moving nonetheless, while mrs Clinton is none too concerned);

    Could be a lot of things, but I think the telltale sign, and the most hopeful one that I take away from the dream, is Andrew's desire to simply move the creature to someplace safe, and not to necessarily hurt it in the process. He also bites it just hard enough to warn it. Just to say "I have a great deal of power, yet I keep that power in check in a responsible way." That kind of leadership is what we need.

    Andrew, you ever though about running for office? I'm serious.

    I think that's what it means, and that is what i take away from that. Knowing Andrew, I think that comes verrry close to the mark.

    Your dream was about a sense of responsibility.

    Now, Frank, I've got to respond to the notion that liberals endanger some timeless values of the country. It was just a passing remark, not meant to start a debate, but it touched a nerve, so here goes. Please forgive me in advance if I run long. In fact, I know I ran long, because I typed all of it and came back to this point to say please-- forgive me.

    First, Hillary clinton is not a 'new liberal.' Not even close. There's nothing radical about her approach to politics. She'd still support keeping NAFTA in place; she'd still have a nebulous, waffly war strategy while trying to look tough. She would still depend on China to finance our national gut-busting overspending problem. She's still deep in the lobbyists pockets. She wouldn't do jack to solve the healthcare crisis in a way that insures all americans. She wouldn't solve the immigration problem or the horrible loss of american jobs overseas, a state of affairs which her husband and the republican senate helped usher through in the 1990's. (Buh-bye american manufacturing industry!! Buh-bye!!)

    I don't trust her. She's a chameleon who changes with the prevailing political wind.

    But enough about Hillary.

    Let's get to the liberal thing. Kennedy said famously in september, 1960 "if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

    I'm a liberal. Yaaaay me!! Oh, right, crap, that's bad.

    What 'values' do we liberals 'threaten' exactly??

    I use myself as an example here. I support a woman's right to choose, yes, although I absolutely abhor the idea of an aborted pregnancy. I favor free healthcare for all americans. If we can spend 500 billion on wars overseas, (and lose 8 billion in cash without blinking) we can certainly ensure pre-natal care, national sex education and support systems for all americans and their children. Shoot, we may find we have built a healthcare network which creates the conditions for women to have children they would otherwise terminate.

    I think healthcare is a basic human right. There. that's a value most liberals share.

    I oppose the death penalty, using it only in extreme circumstances.

    I favor restrictions on certain types of automatic weapons which serve no sporting purpose. I am a defender of the 2nd amendment, but we have no need for some of these automatic weapons we see everywhere.

    I feel very strongly in cutting corporate welfare for companies who move their businesses overseas by outsourcing jobs.

    I would eliminate offshore corporate tax shelters and earmarks in government spending bills.

    I would cancel NAFTA and the WTO.

    I would only trade with countries who practice fair labor standards.

    I support gay marriage. They have it in Massachusetts and none of my relatives really give it a second thought. My dad is getting married next year; He and caroline may disagree with the institution of gay marriage, but so what? It's none of their business! It doesn't impact my dad's life at all. so many children are orphaned these days, but the evangelical wing of the pro-life crowd would have an apoplectic fit if a non-aborted child was adopted by two New England women who love each other and can provide a solid home environment. That makes no sense.

    I don't belive in extraordinary rendition or government-sanctioned torture. I would close guantanamo in a heartbeat and provide these 750 or so 'enemy combatants' with right of due process. Charge them with something or let them go. We can't keep them forever, just to die. That's what China does. That's what they do in Myanmar. That's not america.

    I would get rid of depleted uranium in a heartbeat. that stuff is abhorrent. DU causes cancer in children, it makes the population sick and it doesn't go away. That stuff has been used indiscriminately by the US government. Again, that's not us. We're better than that. Right?

    Obviously I threaten the country because I value nothing, like the rest of my patchouli-drenched bongo-beating liberal bretheren. (I'm being a wiseass, that's not exactly what you said, Frank, I know) I believe in the the bedrock values behind what our country is supposed to stand for. Separation of church and state Buh-bye, 'office of faith-based initiatives!!'

    I don't believe the NSA can wiretap domestically without adhering to the 1979 FISA, and companies like Verizon, AT & T and yahoo (a company that helps track china's political opponets, btw) should be held legally responsible for collusion and invasion of privacy. I dropped Verizon after they disclosed they had been engaging in that behavior. Can you hear me now?
    No? Good!!

    (isn't it funny that the so-called 'small-government' neocon folks want to know exactly who you call, what you read and who you sleep with? Paging rick santorum!!)

    I'm conservative too. Believe it or not, I want Balanced budgets, fair taxes, fair elections and public finacing of elections. Where did we go wrong? No chairman of the company that makes the voting machines should be making the statement that "Diebold will deliver Ohio, that's a promise" without raising some eyebrows. As for fair elections, your boy Guiliani wanted to extend his mayoral administration by three months after 9/11-- just because he felt like it. How democratic of him. Luckily somebody said, "hey Rudy, that's not how we do it in the USA." Imagine that kind of power-grab tendency in a post-attack Guiliani presidency!! Yikes!!

    Rudy did do a good job cleaning up NYC when I lived there, but he also arrested the homeless and turned a blind eye to the horrendous treatment of inmates in NYC prisons-- Amadou Diallo, for one.

    But Guiliani is a demonstration of how similar we are. We're not so different, us zany liberals, huddled up in our small homes with our energy-efficient bulbs burning away while we rescue ants off the windowsill with a 3x5 index card and listening to 'This american Life' on NPR. We want what you want. We want American-made hybrid car. We want affordable insurance. We want to preserve nature, not privatize and bulldoze every centimeter of it. We want a news media that asks tough questions that don't involve 'raising your hand.' We want a secure Israel, but we think end times theology is, well, bullshit. Just like the birth of mormonism. (I'm sorry, It's just. not. true.) just as, in the same breath, we think Hamas, fatah, Al-Qaeda, Islamic jihad and the Iranian government are zombiefied lunatics. we belive that the palestinian people deserve better than cages, checkpoints and starvation. We believe people around the world want the same freedoms we enjoy (and take for granted every day). We don't belive that democracy can be spread at gunpoint. (I was at a Burmese educational festival in Charlottesville today and heard this Monk talk about democracy so passionately that I just about wept) We don't belive in war as an instrument of policy.

    We want what you want. Maybe we can get together sometime in a country big enough for all of us, talk about this,and have a cup of coffee.

    free trade coffee, of course. With soy milk and organic sugar.

    I love youse guys.

  • At 6/17/2007 9:57 AM , Blogger Frank Creasy said...

    Final thought we agree on Scott - love you too man, though there are points herein with which I agree and those with which I disagree, and which are which need not be cited right now.

    It's been one helluva long week, I was free associating and having a little fun at the same time and not meaning to offend or really even to editorialize, since there's no one candidate there on either side of the fence who encompasses all my beliefs or values. Again, there are points you make Scott with which I totally agree...and some with which I completely DISagree. Our beliefs are based on our values, so I've no interest in attacking yours or defending mine - our minds are pretty well made up on certain important points. Agree to disagree, leave it at that.

    I'm not a professional dream interpreter, nor do I play one on TV. But if a recurring role opposite, say, Jennifer Love Hewitt comes up, by all mean, give me a call. ;>)

    Man...I thought Prospero, not Gonzalo, was supposed to raise the tempest!!!

  • At 6/17/2007 11:32 AM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    Mmmm.... Jennifer love Hewitt....

  • At 6/17/2007 12:30 PM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    Frank, I totally understand that what you said didn't come out of spite-- I never took it that way anyway. its because we are such good friends that we can speak this way. I feel comfortable enough with you guys to say what I really feel.

    Let's face it, we live in a country that is divided right down the middle on a few important topics. I'm really interested in what happens at those fault lines. and where they exist, at what points-- Immigration, abortion, Iraq, Healthcare, Taxes, Religion,

    Although I used the above space to state my political beliefs, I honestly want to know what 'values' means to you exactly. Perhaps what do 'values' mean to andrew, as well. Perhaps this thread has gone awry (although I still think your textbook dinosaur bite-tackle means responsibility and concern, dude) but I think there's something there worth discussing, because it seems to me like the NeoConservative movement likes to trot out this image of an America that never was and say, "it was better back then, people had values, not like today when people hate america and value nothing." And I just stand dumbstruck sometimes at the simplicity of the argument. it leaves me scratching my head and going "What are they talking about? What are they so afraid of losing? how would they know it was missing? How am I threatening them? How can they say I hate america when they don't even know me?"

    Perhaps we have different perspectives to draw from. You were in the military lokking first-hand at a giant wall which was built by communist russia to keep their people in line-- the exact opposite of the freedoms we enjoy. You served during the cold war, when tensions ran high and people you knew were actually killed by the other side. You are a homeowner-- you worked very hard to build it, pay for it & you believe that if it was possible for you to achieve that, then anyone can through hard work, and the government is not entitled to tax your ass off after you've sacrificed so much to get what you've got. You belive in the moral authority of the United states, ostensibly because you've seen it's opposite reflected darkly in east germany. You believe in Jennifer Love Hewitt. (As do I!!)

    I guess what I mean to say is, to an extent, I understand where you're coming from, but I'd like to know the rest. maybe this isn't a conversation for the Andrew Hamm White-hot political message board. (You know, I just forgot that I have like MY. OWN. BLOG??) but certainly one worth having. Because there are republican & libertarian ideas which I favor, although I don't believe in total government 'laissez-faire' (like Ron Paul does) because we've see how business can exploit labor when they play unsupervised. I believe people should do the best they can, work hard and save money to buy their own home, but government should help out by providing the social security safety net.

    Ultimately, a person's freedom is directly proportional to the extent of their self-mastery (I'm paraphrasing Socrates, and I have my index finger poiting straight up for dramatic effect) and I do believe that. But I think we need to confront our differences so we can at least understand, if not always agree with, the rest of our American family...

  • At 6/17/2007 3:19 PM , Blogger Andrew Hamm said...

    First of all, dimetrodon is not a dinosaur. It's a pelycosaur, a Permian mammal-like reptile with some similarities to dinosaurs. Some paleontologists group dinosaurs, pelycosaurs, pterosaurs, and plesiosaurs all under a single larger class called "archosaurs," a group that has reptilian features but warm blood. Under this categorization, birds fall under dinosaurs, which fall under Class Archosauria. (I think. I was a lot clearer on the relationships before I realized that Darwinian evolution is criminally bad science.) Second of all, dimetrodon was most assuredly not a herbivore. It was not only a predator but an apex predator, the tippity-top of the food chain. So the dimetrodon definitely had the power to harm the picnickers, but it couldn't harm me. because I was invincible.

    To further complicate matters and slit hairs even finer, I want to point out that Frank referenced "liberal Dems" rather than just "liberals" in his post. Veeerrry important distinction in the context of "threatening timeless values." I think that all three of us can agree that the modern Democratic party has demonstrated very little in the way of any moral authority. Examples: Running in 2006 on stopping the war then making no significant effort to actually do so, supporting Cindy Sheehan until she started calling them out, running in 2006 on a "clean out the corruption" ticket but overlooking massive amounts of graft and corruption in their own party, valuing Scooter Libby's obstruction of justice quite a bit higher than President Clinton's outright perjury, and not acknowledging that "oral sex" includes the word "sex." (As an aside, there has been a massive jump in junior high school kids having oral sex in the past ten years. Children polled don't believe oral sex is sex, so it's okay. Coincidence? No freaking way.)

    What started as a goofy post about a wacky-ass dream has actually turned into one of the most important discussions we've had on this stupid blog (which was, by the way, never intended to become a "white-hot political message board"). I have learned a lot about a lot of subjects since starting this thing, but the maybe most important thing came into focus in the above posts. And it's this simple fact: Scott is very odd.

    No, not in the way you're thinking. Everybody knows Scotto is odd in that way. But Scott is odd, and I hope I am too, in that he's a genuine conscientious thinker and not a politically-affiliated idealogy-bot.

    The Democratic party isn't interested in Scotts. They're interested in drones who will hate what they hate, oppose what they oppose, believe what they tell them to believe, give money, and not ask too many questions. How is that worse than the Republicans? Well, honestly, I think the Dems are much worse about it, they're much more blatant, and they know for damn sure no one checks to see if they're consistent. They'll come out in full-blooded support for something when it polls well, then turn 180 degrees against it with just as much vehemence when the polling numbers change. You have to give the Republicans this: to a much greater degree than the Democrats, Republicans will stick by a course of action they think is right, even in the face of public opposition. I'll grant that this sometimes translates into stubbornness in the face of evidence, but I'm far more comfortable with persistence, consistency, and long-term vision than governance by checking the polling wind vane every few days. We had eight years of that in the Clinton White House, and the result is that our foreign policy and international intelligence presence became wildly popular and wildly powerless.

    The Democratic party isn't interested in Scotts. But I sure as hell am. I love that Scott will genuinely listen to an opposing point of view and engage in dialogue with passion but without rancor. I don't believe there are more than a handful of Democrats in Washington who can do likewise. They're not even idealogues, they're electologues. And they listen about as well as Lincoln Logs.

    There is a huge and growing disconnection* between the ideas of our two parties and the actual beliefs of the people. Precious few of us are red and blue these days; we're all shades of purple. Yes, there is a rift in the center of this country greater than at any time since the Civil War; I truly believe that. But I also believe that we may be looking at a growing gulf between the parties and their constituencies. The candidacy of a moderate conservative like Rudy Giuliani is a very good thing; in fact I think it's probably better for America's liberals if he wins than if Obama or Clinton do. I'm convinced that either one of them will polarize the country even more, and I'm entirely convinced that we're going to see the G.O.P. take back both houses in '08. I think the only Democratic candidate whose conscience I believe in is Kucinich. Obama has some things going for him, but he's hiding his liberal lamp under a bushel to court moderate voters. Bottom line: the D.C. Democrats refuse to be who they are in favor of being elected.

    I oppose liberal issues about 75-80% of the time, I think. But I want there to be a strong and morally clear liberal presence in this country to balance my conservatism. I need to be able to test the validity of my beliefs against some opposition or I won't know if I'm right about them, and I definitely need someone to convince me when I'm wrong. I need those people to be like Scott, who believes what he believes because he believes it, not because it's a stance he needs to take to ensure election results.

    Dialogue is good. Today's Democrats are not even remotely interested in dialogue. They're interested in getting what they want.

    Now as for my running for office... In the words of Keith Moon, when Robert Plant and Jimmy Page told him what kind of music their new band was going to play: "That'll fly just about as well as a lead zeppelin."

    Actually, I've given it some passing thought in the past few years. I don't think there's a chance in hell I would get elected, but...

    Since I gave my life to Christ in 1997, I have been very aware of the need for people who see a need to do what's necessary to fill it. That has resulted in my filling in on whatever instrument my church has needed, taking whichever role or staff position Richmond Shakespeare has needed me in, and serving as Youth Minister when my church needed it. I guess if I felt strongly enough that my presence would make a difference that is needed, I would run for office of some kind. I have no idea if I would be any good at it, but...

    Come on, I've got to be as smart as Ronald Reagan or Arnold Schwarzenegger, right?

    * Please note that "disconnect" is actually a verb. There is no such thing as "a disconnect," no matter how many times people on TV and the radio say it.

  • At 6/17/2007 3:20 PM , Blogger Andrew Hamm said...

    I used the word "need" apporoximately 68,000 times in that last section.

  • At 6/17/2007 3:28 PM , Blogger Andrew Hamm said...

    By the way: very funny that Scott would want me to run for office when there's no way in the world that he would vote for me. But maybe that's what makes it so awesome.

  • At 6/17/2007 4:15 PM , Blogger Frank Creasy said...

    Grogginess from late night opening reception starting to wear off...kryptonite must be in lead box now...feeling better...

    Still, I'm not sure I can post all my beliefs in one sitting here, but Scott, you make some very good observations about what has driven my beliefs and values. Because you see, I don't have anything against the Democratic party specifically...I've voted for some Democrats at certain levels, though I've not yet found a presidential candidate I wanted in the Oval Office (but I'm leaving options open for 2008). So what CAN I say that might best describe my values?

    Most folks form their political beliefs early in their adulthood, and I'm not much different. While I was in college, the Iranians took the hostages in Tehran. Less than five years after the end of the Vietnam War, we all thought then that we'd be going to war...and THIS time, we thought, there was good reason for it! How DARE they do that to Americans?

    But the reasons I believe we might go to war in such circumstances (or seriously consider it...because I don't take sending troops off to die lightly) is based on protecting American economic interests. And I guess that's the thing for me. I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, not a liberal or a conservative. I'm a capitalist. Our country is based on a free market economy. I believe, in the absence of Communist threats to take over the world (and having served in the military during the Cold War, I have no doubt at all that such was the goal of the Soviet Union), that Islamic terrorism seeks to destroy Western civilization by using terrorism to undermine our economy. In the post 9-11 days, they almost succeeded in destroying the airline industry in this country.

    A free market economy means some businesses and industries will succeed...some will fail...and some will become obsolete. I believe government should have limited involvement in these market forces. But when other countries or groups attempt to undermine these natural market conditions by the use of force, then I believe American goverment involvement is both warranted and necessary. This does NOT mean military force each time, but it does not preclude it either.

    There are many "liberal" beliefs I share, such as same-sex marriage. I believe two people in love should have the right to commit to one another legally. But I take issue with the approach of many in the Democratic party who believe corporate profits, legally earned, should be monitored and controlled by the government. It's hard to love the oil industry, and I hate high gas prices. But I don't drive a big-ass SUV and it's quite likely my 401K plan has some mutual fund money in one or more of those businesses. So long as those companies are not breaking any laws, I have no issue with their profits. Chances are, they are also making charitable contributions directly to worthy organizations, and I believe such donations are more efficient by far than any government attempts to redistribute wealth. Regardless of the party in power, the federal government has NEVER shown itself capable of functioning as efficiently as the private sector. Why should they? They do not have to provide the level of accounting a publicly-held stock corporation must provide to shareholders. We, the shareholders of the government (that is, TAXPAYERS), get no such reporting from our government.

    Less government, good; government protection of American economic interests, good; government attempts to redistribute wealth, bad. That's my basic summary of values. Beyond that, I'm pretty much a "live and let live" kind of guy. Join PETA if you want...wear a fur coat if that suits you. Don't make no neveah mind to me.

    Hope that helps, Scotto, to kind of set down what I believe. But, let's face it...I'm a work in progress. None of this is set down in stone.

    Shit...four hours to curtain. Better start pumping coffee into me!

  • At 6/19/2007 10:00 AM , Anonymous Philip Hamm said...

    Wow Scott, I never took you for a Pat Buchannon-style isolationist! You'd completely destroy the economy! (of the world, not just the USA)

  • At 6/19/2007 4:43 PM , Blogger Andrew Hamm said...

    [John McLaughlin]
    WRONG! Pat Buchanan!
    [/John McLaughlin]

  • At 6/19/2007 10:22 PM , Blogger Frank Creasy said...

    The "slash- John McLaughlin" to end the tag is PRICELESS. PRICELESS! can't end a string with 13 comments. Very superstitious....

  • At 6/20/2007 12:42 PM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    Its not over!!! Here come More lemony-fresh packets of talk-backy goodness!!

    [John McLaughlin]
    Phillip Hamm!!
    Scott Wichmann!! How do youuuuu see the US's dependent relationship with China and the developing wooooorld??

    Scott wichmann: John, I love Pat Buchanan. He'd probably roll his eyes at some of my ideas, but I like the fact that he's his own guy, and a true conservative. Listen-- I'm actually more of a Ralph Nader guy myself. I think we've got to bring industry back to the US mainland and start producing our own exports. It only makes sense. Corporate welfare subsidies need a serious overhaul. When companies are given $100 Million in subsidies, tax breaks and assistance, only to turn record profits while laying off 40,000 people, something is seriously wrong. Corporate welfare queens don't always need that money, but small businesses do, and SB's are more likely to pay that money back to uncle sam! There is a balance between importing and exporting, and the balance is seriously tipped in the favor of countries like china, who have us over the economic barrel.

    As it is, we're running up the US credit card to dangerous levels and putting ourselves at the mercy of the Chinese economy. And like a giant red, white and blue crack whore, we're hooked on supporting the biggest environmental polluter (China) and the worst worker's right abuser (China) which also harvests organs from Falun Gong and Tibetan Buddhist practitioners for sale on the black market. I swear I saw a pancreas for sale at sam's club-- for cheap!! With a smiley-face sticker!! that's how bad it's getting!! (kidding. I kid.)

    we're co-dependent on a pusher who gives no regard to human life and only wants money and power (and we're also becoming complicit in that cycle) Funny how that happened, because I always though the US fought for and won it's-- umm... what was the word... oh, umm... shit....yeah...errr.... umm... INDEPENDENCE!!

    The US needs to support the right of workers in the developing world to organize Unions. If we're so worried about freedom, democracy and the right of free people everywhere, we should be using our considerable influence to educate the world about the positive aspects of union labor movements as they relate to the welfare of workers worldwide. Speaking as a union member in one of the fields where non-union labor is severely taken advantage of, I can tell you that having an organization behind you gives you leverage to get some very basic things. Comprehensive low-cost healthcare, Pension, Mortgage assistance, dental plan, fair work standards and a voice to speak on your behalf. Too many people around the world have no idea that such a thing is even possible, and it's up to us to show them how to do it. Union labor and workers rights are the only way to go to get any kind of balance in the new global economy. People in china have said "we don't want the US people to stop buying our products-- we just want them to tell the world what is happening here."

    I have no problem with making money-- but when it is soaked with the blood of children, I expect my country's government will at least step up and speak for the powerless. Buy local. Buy american.

    [John McLaughlin]
    WRONG!! Scott Wichmaaaaan is a Nader Nerrrrd! Hamm brothers, care to respond?? Fraaaaank Creeeasy, How about yoooooou? Next topic-- Will Hillary Clinton continue to support the troops by calling for a us pullout by continuing to fund a war she opposes but mysteriously voted for while at the same time denouncing yet claiming she could do a better job prosecuting? we'll be right back...

  • At 6/21/2007 3:18 AM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    "Democrats refuse to be who they are in favor of being elected."

    True, dude-- SO true. I re-read your post above and loved it. I think if it wasn't for Kucinich, Congressman Tim Ryan of Ohio, Patrick Leahy and Russ Feingold, the Dems would probably lose me... and that sucks, because they have always purported to be the party of the underdog; The downtrodden-- "A hand up, not a handout"

    I fell in love with the DNC because of the The Bobby Kennedy vision of America. He would be stunned at the level of DNC discourse today, I truly believe. (even though he was cautious about speaking out against a war his brother actually set in motion) Now, We have a Clinton-bot frontrunner who panders and smiles and does her little Proteus act, and Obama who has generated much heat and political momentum, only to sit on it, afraid to stir up the pot by saying something provocative. He's playing the political version of the prevent defense-- (and its only june of 2007) --and we all know the prevent defense 'prevents' you from winning!! The media make sit impossible to get any other viewpoints represented in the two parties, and america suffers. All they do is cover the fund-raising horse race and talk about haircuts,
    divorces, and theme songs. Ugh.

    But you're right-- criticize the Dems for anything and you're a gay-bashing racist fill-in-the-blank because you want them to represent solutions to problems and not just whine....

  • At 6/21/2007 9:55 AM , Blogger Andrew Hamm said...

    [John McLaughlin]
    A "craaack whoooore," Scoooooootttt? Reeeaaaaallllllyyyyy?
    [/John McLaughlin]

    Guys, feel free to lighten up any political discourse on this board with JML tags any time you like. That is officially an Andrew Hamm-endorsed wacky gag.

  • At 6/21/2007 1:32 PM , Blogger Dave T said...

    I may be sorry about wading in on this one but I just can’t hep myseff! I want to say that Scotty isn’t an oddity in being a conscientious thinker with a liberal bent. He’s not unusual even in this conservative bastion of Virginia. I’ve got a few pals I’d consider very conscientious thinkers with distinctly liberal points of view. And while I may not always be reasonable, I do try to be conscientious, though I’m as tree-hugging, latte-drinking, and Prius-driving as the next liberal (well, maybe not as my tastes run more toward frappucinos and I drive an Outback). My openness to hearing conservative points of view is pretty much required as everyone else in my family is conservative – even my gay, no healthcare having, domestic-partner loving, child-adopting sister (a paradigm-blower for me, that’s for sure). But I’m also blessed with a Limbaugh-loving mom who is pro-choice…go figure!

    What I can heartily agree with is that the divide is growing between the electorate and the established parties. You can look at Dean’s run in 2004 as proof of that – the guy who injected more energy into the party than anyone was more or less shut down by the Dems. You can see why a guy like Bloomberg thinks he has an opportunity.

    My mission here, as a liberal, is of course to piss everyone off. But I’m equal opportunity so let’s start with Scotty. I’ve been studying Chinese history and culture for the past two years and blanket statements of the evil that is China don’t do anything to promote understanding or solutions to the potential economic catastrophe that is the U.S. economy. China was ruled by emperors for thousands of years until less than 100 years ago – and the imperial age is now looked back on as a golden age in China. For the past 150 years, China has been shat upon repeatedly by the industrialized west – Google the Opium Wars, the Boxer Rebellion, or the Rape of Nanking for just a few of the highlights. Ideological policies in the 20th century -- nationalist and communist -- had the country on the verge of collapse until a little over 30 years ago. So any government that provides the hope – and delivers results – of raising a larger percentage of its gargantuan population out of the abject poverty it been living in for decades should not be casually dismissed as an “evil empire.” I’m no apologist for those that imprison advocates for democracy but it’s way too easy to lose the forest for the trees when looking at China. Spend some time looking at the numbers for India, a democracy with crushing poverty, insane wealth disparity and teetering on the brink of environmental disaster and the “capitalistic Communism” of China doesn’t look nearly as bad.

    I don’t know where to start with some of Andrew’s and Frank’s comments. Perhaps by saying that I agree with many things you all say – particularly about the Democratic Party – but couldn’t disagree more with other things. My most current and particular beef has to do with corporate graft. My dad was a corporate CEO and I have a great respect for the large percentage of honest, brilliant businessmen out there. But even he was getting sick of the inequities perpetrated by corporations in his later years (he died 5 years ago). The CEO of the private equity firm that is currently prompting Congress to consider revising the corporate tax code is worth $7 billion dollars, a single individual who if considered on the international GDP scale would rank somewhere in the neighborhood of Cambodia and Mozambique. And his firm was exempt from corporate taxes because of an accounting definition -- millions of dollars stolen from the American people (IMHO). It easy to say that corporate gains are “legal” but are they “right” or “moral” given the influence corporations have over the drafting of the rules that govern them – and the growing number of people without healthcare and getting gypped out of their pensions?

    I also have a problem with equating Clinton’s indiscretions with anything happening today. Maybe he did perjure himself and maybe he should have been impeached. I won’t argue that. But there is a qualitative difference (again in my opinion) between lying about outing a CIA agent and lying about doing your intern. It gets lost in the shuffle these days but Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson were/are patriots. They were government employees interested in the truth. There are CIA agents who regularly risk their lives to help their country – not unlike those in the military. You can bet that if Libby was a Dem, he’d have been burned at the stake by now. And Cheney – the guy pulling his strings – would have been struck down as well.

    My biggest problem with just about anyone – but particularly politicians – is hypocrisy. And in my view, conservative politicians have simply been more hypocritical in the past decade. I’m not saying the Dems haven’t done their share, but for the Republicans it runs from guys like Gingrich and Guiliani who apparently can’t keep their dicks in their pants -- to Bush railing against big government and nation building, then continuing to perpetrate huge deficits and embroiling us in two expensive and ridiculously complex nation-building exercises – to Bush signing bills into law while at the same time saying he isn’t planning to abide by them!

    And in my experience, it’s not just us liberals who feel this way. Among my very conservative family, I hear grumblings all the time about the Republicans losing sight of those conservative values. The Democrats on the other hand – well, they just seem to forget in their urgent desire to win over more Republicans that it’s liberal values that make up their foundation – the kind of liberal values that were prevalent in the days of Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson and were essential in the founding of this country.

    I know this post has been all over the place but I just felt compelled to add some fuel to the fire. I didn’t want this white hot spot to cool down!

    PS: It seems we all can agree on our support of Jennifer Love Hewitt’s candidacy. Down with big government…up with big boobs!

    PPS: Though with Bush and his crew, you could say we’ve been dealing with big boobs for 7 years now…yuk yuk

  • At 6/22/2007 1:48 AM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    Dave, first off-- Great to have you back. Second, great that you jumped into the chat which has evolved considerably from Andrew's dream of biting a pelycosaur in the right-shoulder quadrant.

    Regarding China-- Thanks for the info. I'll definitely look into all of those things you mentioned, especially India. It is really something that a country so far down at one point can make such an amazing turnaround in such a short time. Often times, as we have seen, those developing countries have a real motivation to succeed, and that motivation blinds them to the methods they use to achieve goals.

    that's the nice way of putting it.

    My problem is with the methods China has used to get where it is. The skyscrapers, bridges and Olympic stadiums we see there are being built by virtual slave labor. Just yesterday, China announced it was going to pave a path on everest for foreign tourists to traverse. rest assured, The job won't be done by some swell corporation with a handle on OSHA regulations-- it'll be tibetan Sherpas who get forced into building it until they die of frostbite, only to be replaced by the next dispsable work unit. I also don't recall ever hearing about political and religious prisoners having their organs auctioned off in India, but like I said, I'll take a deep look. It'll probably only serve to make me feel angrier, sadder, and even more politically neutered.

    That totally sucks.

    I characterized the Chinese government as "a pusher who gives no regard to human life and only wants money and power" and I think that is abundantly clear. I have never used the phrase "Evil empire," But if I were to do so, China and the government of Myanmar (formerly Burma) would be the ones I'd tag it with.

    China is providing arms & reosurces to the Janjaweed militas in darfur, whom they arm to guard the Oil Pipelines there. The US should seriously consider Boycotting the 08 olympics in Beijing to show the world what a sham this is and what a horrible system the Chinese government is perpetuating. People want us to stop the Genocide in Darfur, and china can play a HUGE role in doing just that-- it's just not on their dance card. (or ours, although Bush did manage to hit them with economic sanctions, which is more than most world leaders can say-- that's like the one thing I can think of to give W credit for. That and his 2001 World series slider at Yankee stadium. Wow.)

    But back to china-- Just today, I saw this in the International Herald Tribune:

    "China manufactured every one of the 24 kinds of toys recalled for safety reasons in the United States so far this year, including the enormously popular Thomas & Friends wooden train sets, a record that is causing alarm among consumer advocates, parents and regulators.

    Just in the last month, a ghoulish fake eyeball toy made in China was recalled after it was found to be filled with kerosene. Sets of toy drums and a toy bear were also recalled because of lead paint, and an infant wrist rattle was recalled because of a choking hazard.Over all, the number of products made in China that are being recalled in the United States by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has doubled in the last five years, driving the total number of recalls in the country to 467 last year, an annual record.

    It also means that China today is responsible for about 60 percent of all product recalls, compared with 36 percent in 2000."

    We have to get out of bed with China. They not only don't care about their own workers, or their own environment, but now they are even putting overseas customers at risk with shoddy manufacturing practices. Why are we trading with these people again?

    Yahoo, microsoft, Google, and several other internet tech service providers willingly abide by censorship laws in China and in many cases turn over ISP addresses of individuals who communicate dissenting material over the web. At a senate hearing on the subject, a GOP lawmaker said to a Yahoo official (paraphrasing) "So basically what you're telling me is that Yahoo is telling the Nazis where Anne Frank is hiding... and saying they had no choice, they signed a censhorship agreement?"

    Excuse my language, but what the fuck is an american company doing propping up such horrific conditions? Then using the nurembug defense "I was just doing my job" all for a couple of bucks. If one Googles 'Tank man' or 'tianemen square', all one sees are pictures of smiling tourists. The information about the 1989 student uprising ha been effectively wiped away. I saw a 'Frontline' about it and the students at the very same university were shown the Tank man image and had no ability to contextualize it, because they had never seen it. Some of them had no idea it was even China in the picture. That's a horrible brainwashing. but, the kids in the big cities there have McDonald's and Gaps and cellphones now, and the middle class is exploding, so it's all good.

    I feel very passionately about this particular issue. Our elected officials never say jack about China's government in this country-- and I don't mean the usual Xenophobic blather, I mean substantive and nuanced criticism of the fact that we have surrendered so much and tied our future in Knots with China's by letting them buy all of our debt. Go to any store and check the products. they're almost all made in China. Finding good American made items is incredibly difficult. Just go into any store tomorrow and look for chinese-made stuff.

    I say we send Jennifer Love Hewitt as a goodwill ambassador to China. All she'll have to do is pout and they'll fix everything!!

    I'm tired, gotta go to bed. Talk to all y'all tomorrow!!

  • At 6/22/2007 12:33 PM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    "If one Googles 'Tank man' or 'tianemen square', all one sees are pictures of smiling tourists. The information about the 1989 student uprising ha been effectively wiped away."

    Sorry, I meant to say that if you're in China and you google 'Tank Man' and Tienamen square they come up with smiling tourists-- it's like a completely different reality.

    there's a story on NPR about the horrible food imports China is sending to us dailiy at:

    everything from Dog food to Fish to
    Herbal tea is filled with chemicals and other health hazards.

  • At 6/25/2007 1:23 PM , Anonymous Philip Hamm said...

    Excuse my language, but what the fuck is an american company doing propping up such horrific conditions? Then using the nurembug defense "I was just doing my job" all for a couple of bucks. If one Googles 'Tank man' or 'tianemen square', all one sees are pictures of smiling tourists. The information about the 1989 student uprising ha been effectively wiped away. I saw a 'Frontline' about it and the students at the very same university were shown the Tank man image and had no ability to contextualize it, because they had never seen it. Some of them had no idea it was even China in the picture.

    Here is a link for anyone to watch online.

    Frontline is the best thing in American Journalism today. Maybe ever. IMHO of course.

    China as a US trade partner is an interesting and complicated quandry. I'm pretty much an isolationist also, BTW. I'd be willing to see the "global economy" take a big hit (including my retirement savings) in order to secure more localized economic systems. That's just my opinion though.

    The way I see it, once oil peaks (and it may have already done so) localization on a grand scale will be an inevitability anyway.

  • At 6/25/2007 1:35 PM , Blogger Dave T said...

    Hiya again, Scotty, and it’s great to be back.

    I won’t argue with anything you are saying about China, except for perhaps the evil empire designation thing which I mistakenly foisted upon you but you seem to be accepting. China is far from perfect – and these latest product and food export issues only scratch the surface of the serious problems that can and will arise from the exponential growth in China’s power and influence. There are still significant civil rights problems and the disregard for the environment is appalling.

    However, I do take issue with the evil empire designation because of one point I think you are totally wrong about: the Chinese government has a great, abiding regard for human life. Over the past few decades, it has been working in a concerted and controlled way to raise the standard of living of its billion people so that it is within even an order of magnitude of the rest of the industrialized countries. Even after the huge growth in the country over the past 15 years (double digit percentage growth almost every year), the current per capita wealth is in line with Peru and Venezuela, below that of Turkey and Mexico. So how does it raise that standard of living – acquire and build wealth! And how does it prevent itself from being beaten, intimidated, or slaughtered by its pals Russia and Japan (who have shat on it repeatedly over the years)? Become more powerful! So yes, China is interested primarily is acquiring wealth and consolidating power, precisely because of its regard to human life.

    China is still largely a third-world country and it is regularly judged by first world standards. You mentioned the near-slave labor behind much of the current growth; what was it that sustained the early agricultural economy of the US and built the railroads? Actual slave labor and near-slave labor. And what atrocities did the US commit as part of its manifest destiny? Slaughtered American Indians, stole from and intimidated Mexican natives, exploited nearly every immigrant group that showed up at its shores (including the Chinese who were integral in the expansion west). And you want to talk environmental degradation, I have three words for you: Core of Engineers. The projects that were essential to our growth as a country, like the Tennessee Valley Authority for instance, destroyed rivers throughout the country.

    Why I am laying this out? Because if you get into it with someone from China, that’s what you’re going to get back. I’ve been lucky to become acquainted with several Chinese citizens over the past couple of years. For the most part, everyone I’ve met loves America and Americans. However, I have also heard or read at least twice variations of “How dare you!” Sure, it’s fine for the US to do whatever the fuck it wanted for 200 years to get where it is, but now that China is on the rise, they get told to be responsible, take care of the earth, don’t use too much oil, etc. etc.

    Don’t get me wrong: I don’t condone what China does. However, I think the relationship between China and the US is and will be THE most important international relationship in this century. It is a large motivating factor behind my decision to start studying China and Chinese culture. But I don’t think we will get anywhere, either as individuals or as a country, by scolding the Chinese. What we’ll hear back is: a) get your own house in order (the huge murder rate in America is one statistics the Chinese apparently love to “tut-tut” about), and/or 2) you got a problem with us? Fine, pay us back all the billions you owe us and we’ll take our business elsewhere. Have a nice economic collapse!

    Scott, I absolutely agree we need to “get out of bed” with the Chinese. And I am all for more “substantive and nuanced criticism” because I don’t know half of what I’d like to know about them, us, and our relationship (though I try to sound like I know it all!) Clearly we need to get some backbone back in our policies, which have been backsliding at least since Clinton’s early days and his “delinking” decision (to untie economic relations and human rights between the countries). It wouldn’t hurt to give more support to our manufacturing sector either so we have more options as far as purchasing. But, as I said in my last post, we can’t lose site of the forest for the trees. Because instead of cooperation and progress from China, we’re more likely to get back a laundry list of our own foibles (how many civilians y’all kill in Iraq? And what exactly happened in Abu Ghraib? Hey, where are you guys putting all of that nuclear waste? Your federal deficit is WHAT?)

  • At 6/25/2007 4:20 PM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    I think for anyone from China to defend the status of their developing country's rapid growth by pointing out america's past use of slave and immigrant labor is both irresponsible and hypocritical.

    First off, if they are aware of the horrors of slavery as they relate to the horrible current labor conditions in their own country, then they should not accept them!! Defending China's current iniquities by referencing those of our past doesn't wholly address the situation.

    The disproportionate economic boom in the Chinese middle class hides the horrible conditions of the Rural farmers, who live in abject poverty-- and whose children, mostly daughters, travel to the cities and supply the cheap-as-dirt manufacturing labor that enables middle-class chinese people to have cars, cellphones and laptops. If China's economy is booming, and they care so deeply about human life, then why do the workers not share even a little bit more in China's economic prosperity? The US congress is set to raise the federal minimum wage (it's about time) why doesn't China?

    Secondly, the United States has largely amended the its ways regarding the questions of slavery, labor laws, and human rights. Our history has been marked by one grass-roots fight after another over many social iniquities, and it is to our credit as a people that we have a system in place where those issues could be addressed. we are still a work in progress, and our house is far from being 'in order.' Yet many americans and their families have already paid the highest price for our country's original sin of slavery and the subsequent struglles for civil rights and gender equality. We have much more work to do. In fact, I still believe strongly in reparations for the families of former slaves; I think it is an issue that deserves
    to be talked about. In China, the minute you open your mouth or write about equality, representation, or human rights-- you disappear.

    Now, here in the US, we find ourselves at the crossroads of a larger issue of illegal immigration and the horrendous historical system of US business routinely taking advantage of an underclass of migrant workers who have no legal rights, protections or insurance. China could hold thats system over our heads as well, while calling us Hypocrites.

    But, let's be clear, being "a pusher who gives no regard to human life and only wants money and power" isn't the same as being 'Evil.' They could also call us
    "a pusher who gives no regard to human life and only wants money and power" -- and they would be right in many respects, chiefly in areas regarding intervention in Third World countries (Vietnam, Panama, Iraq) and horrible environmental abuses, as well as refusals to join the land mine treaty, the chemical weapons treaty, the Kyoto protocols and a host of others. But that doesn't make us "Evil" anymore than China is 'Evil' for pursuing it's interests by any means necessary. It is a divisive term which serves only to distance us from them further and further. I shouldn't be so quick to call them 'evil..'

    But, then again, I don't ever remember the US grabbing political dissidents and religious practitioners and slaughtering them by the thousands and selling their organs, as well as imprisoning anyone who demonstrates dissent. We in the US have a voice and we still have the freedom to use that voice. We should not accept the excuses which the chinese would point to as a way to obscure the issue. I believe that the Chinese people are entitled to a voice, and it is their government that believes otherwise. (try distributing a picture of HH The Fourteenth Dala Lama in China and watch what happens) Indeed, we here in the US have our problems, and many of us are aware and using our voices in opposition to the policies which exacerbate those problems. But we should also not be afraid to point the finger WHEREVER there is injustice and say "This needs to change."

    I agree with everything you say, Dave, and it will take a veeery delicate diplomatic hand and a great deal of understanding, patience and compassion to deal with the Chinese government in ways which pave the way for a mutual understanding. Let's send Congressman Kucinich over there as a diplomat...

    Off topic, will we see you at the 'Odd Couple' opening on friday night??


  • At 6/25/2007 9:54 PM , Blogger Dave T said...

    Big thanks to Andrew for giving Scotty and I this chance to catch up!

    Also big thanks to Scott for giving me a nice perspective adjustment. In my defense, about 6 weeks ago I finished a 25 page paper about the Japanese occupation of China before and during WWII so I'm a little defensive on China's behalf these days. But I appreciate your clarity and sense of perspective, and I'll have to remember it when I get TOO down on my fave country, the ole US of A. Have YOU ever thought of running for office?

    As to the OC, I'm still in negotiations with my beloved about that one (and no, I don't mean the Arts editor at Style). I'm hoping either opening night or Sat. I'm looking forward to it.

    Break legs,

  • At 6/26/2007 9:34 AM , Anonymous Philip Hamm said...

    Another monkey wrench...

    A large part of the reason China is so powerful economically is because their currency is grossly undervalued on the world market.

    What changes when they have a real floating currency? Who puts the pressure on them to do so?

  • At 6/26/2007 12:40 PM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    I do.

    "Hey China, what's the freakin' deal?? Raise the value of your monetary unit or I'm comin' ovahh there!!"

    "...No answer, huh?? Well, fellas, I guess I'd better start walking."

    (Actually, Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and Congressman Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) are trying to do just that very thing, and I think it's great that they can work together like this.)

  • At 6/26/2007 1:55 PM , Blogger Dave T said...

    A couple more subsidiary points:
    -- American corporations provided the builk of the pressure behind Clinton's de-linking decision back in the 90s and continue to lobby for as many open economic doors between the countries. It's going to take a lot to get the corporate world to alter their view of China as the source for unlimited cheap goods and cheap labor as well as possible huge new market for American goods. Until they do, I don't think you're going to see substantial change. And given politicians beholding to corporate money (helped along by the Supremes just yesterday -- go Supremes!), I don't see that changing soon.
    -- I don't know enough about the current circumstances but I know a large reason for China's monetary policy being what it is grew out of the Chinese acting definitively to stabilize all of southeast Asia during the economic crisis of 1997-8. For those old enough to remember, there was talk of large-scale collapse of the region's economy at the time. Just a little historical perspective...

  • At 6/26/2007 5:14 PM , Blogger Scott Wichmann said...

    Here's something from a Boston Sports Guy Cha on ESPN.COM this afternoon:

    "Aaron (Cville): Did you see that the Chinese government wants Yi Jianlan to go to the Celts? If Ainge picks him, at least you can blame it on a conspiracy and not incompetence.

    SportsNation Bill Simmons: (4:44 PM ET ) The Chinese already ruined the sixth season of "24" - now they're gonna ruin the Celtics?"

    OH NOOOO!!! Well, Yi should be used to horrible working conditions and terrible management by now-- Doc Rivers' Celtics will make him feel right at home... That would be my cosmic comeuppance for lambasting Chinese trade policies & work standards...

  • At 6/27/2007 2:30 PM , Blogger Dave T said...

    Yes, the eternal balance of yin and yang...generally leads to comeuppance of some kind. Whenever I criticize a show, I can count on my wife criticizing my "performance" before too long...(cue the rim shot)
    (oh sorry, bad context...nevermind)

    Anyway, it was the whole "unnamed Middle Eastern country / Russian hard-liners" plotline that killed this past season of 24, long before they got around to resolving the China issue. For more of my thoughts on THAT one ('cause I'm SURE you're interested in even more T-line gab at this point...), check out this site, with me writing as "D."


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home