Ubiquitous Academicians

The other day, I was preparing to structure a post condemning my writing partner, Ethan, for unjustly going after Hillary Clinton again and again, sometimes for what I consider to be minor faults. Then I realized something, something that is only furthered proved by her attitude during her most recent wins.

It’s all about the pride now.

Any candidate who had the good of the Democratic Party in mind would have, in Clinton’s position, stepped out of the race long ago to allow the obvious forerunner to hit the November elections with momentum and support. They would realize that prolonging the nomination is splintering and weakening the party. They would put their pride aside and do what is for the best of the Democratic Party.

Clinton’s not a candidate who has the good of the party in mind.

Even though she cannot win at this point unless she gets, perhaps, ninety percent wins in all the remaining states, she continues to pour money into her campaign and pretend that she stands a chance. The truth, however, is that she can’t stand to lose. She’s like an immature child in that she can’t accept lost, so she’s going to be sure to take her opponent, Obama, down with her.

This prolonged division in the party is allowing McCain to pull far ahead of both candidates (recent polls indicate that he would win against either.) And, at this rate, unless Hillary pulls out and throws support to her party and not her pride, we’re going to see another Republican—no, another Bush–sitting in the white house.

Ugh.

Your writer,

We really should write about something other than politics.

In case I ever forget, I’d like everyone on this planet to remind me - never, ever get the endorsment of Hillary Clinton, for anything.

Anything at all.

I didn’t watch it. But, I heard about it. At the Kentucky Derby, the horse that Mrs. Clinton endorsed had a bit of bad luck. Lots, actually. She ended up euthanized.

I’d recommend reading the full story here.

I feel terrible. I really do. It’s very unfair to the horse, that something like this should happen.

On a positive note, one of these days I bet I’ll think of something other than good old Hil’ to write about.

I just hope she doesn’t agree with me.

How does she manage? Now, judging by the fact that I parodied a Britney Spears title for my title (no, I don’t own the CD. I did once, for about three hours before I broke it up into tiny pieces and trashed it. No, I didn’t spend money on it - it was a “gift” which I valued approximately between argyle socks and a battered map of the Horn of Africa.) you must be thinking I’m referring to Britney herself. No, I’m not - I don’t talk about wacky celebrities. Instead, I’m referring to Hillary Clinton (Hooray! Another unfounded rant by Ethan about Mrs. Clinton!) who managed to win Pennsylvania.
Now, for a word on how she did it. Apparently, she won over the large body of blue-collar “Average-Joes” and their wives. How? Well, I’m about to analyze this.
Let me say, first off, if I was a Pennsylvanian Average Joe, I’d be severely insulted. While Mr. Obama went bowling and ate at a diner, Mrs. Clinton downed a shot of whiskey followed by a chaser of beer. How’s that for an idea? I bet Bill came up with it… “Say, honey, here’s a thought: These blue-collar guys drink a lot, don’t they? Wouldn’t that be a good way to make them think you’re like them?”
Right. Because I want a president like that in the White House. Like I want that Britney Spears CD.

Last Friday night, I watched Lions for Lambs, a political, thought-provoking film directed and starring Robert Redford. Lions for Lambs is put together quite interestingly; there are three section of the film which are transitioned between throughout the course of the movie. One section stars the aforementioned Robert Redford as a professor meeting with a gifted, but disaffected student. Redford tries to coax his student into participating more and attempting to make a difference in the world. The next section follows two soldiers spearheading a new plan in Afghanistan. These two soldiers were students of Redford, but, against his wishes, they decided the best way to make a difference would be to put their lives on the line. Lastly, we have a portion starring Meryl Streep, an experienced journalist, interviewing Tom Cruise, an up-and-coming Republican senator. Cruise’s character, who is one of the minds behind the new strategy in Afghanistan, is revealing the plans to Streep while simultaneously attempting to justify many of the United State’s failings in the war.

The movie itself is rather lacking. It is essentially made up of a number of lectures that use far too many words to explain relatively simple concepts, which can be a bit tiresome, and Tom Cruise continues to disturb me, but the underlying message is a good one. Lions for Lambs tells its audience that, in this day and age, every person should become involved in defining events of the time. The film explores both participation in political and military change, but it does not point either out as the definitive path, rather, it communicates the more general political or moral theme of participation in change.

I might not recommend this movie, but I can fully support the message behind it.

Your writer,

I’m in San Francisco for a while, but one thing that is not on my agenda is watching the Olympic torch run. Let me say for the record, I have never watched the entire Olympic games - only sections I really enjoy, such as fencing. This isn’t because I don’t like the events; they merely coincide with other happenings, and don’t take top priority.

Basically, I don’t have very strong opinions about the Olympics. However, when ridiculous hypocrites create an atmosphere of fear and animosity during the celebration of a wonderful attempt at unity and sportsmanship, I am truly disgusted. I’m referring, of course, to the protesters for Tibet. Now I will admit, I’m not very informed on this conflict, so I won’t speak too ardently - but from what I have observed, the Tibetan people really do need our support, and China seems to be out of line. That’s all I will say.

But people - come on! When there is a close ratio of security personnel to spectators, you’ve must admit there is a problem. When people are being leaping around and attacking each other like battle-crazy barbarians, there must be a problem.

Especially when it’s being done in the name of PEACE!

You know, if you really cared about the Tibetan people, you’d be doing something to help them - not ruining this honored celebration.

And on the other side of the coin, it’s a flame! While it is symbolic, and crucial to the ceremony, it’s certainly not worth all this insanity.

Basically, I wish people would use theirs heads, instead of charging off to make peace using violence.

In the midst of various activities this week, I didn’t really get a chance to keep up on the current events - much less write about them. In any case, I apologize for my desultory posts.

A great loss has been sustained by the role-playing community this week: Gary Gygax, co-creator of Dungeons and Dragons, passed away on the fourth of this month.

Born Ernest Gary Gygax in 1938, Mr. Gygax - along with Dave Arneson - created the first Dungeons and Dragons role-playing game. He played his entire life, faithfully Dungeon-mastering right up until his death. He has been a fixture in role-playing culture, often known affectionately as “The Great Gygax.” He attended many conventions and other events, and loved to receive feedback from D&D Players from around the globe.

Among his other accomplishments are co-founder of Tactical Studies Rules (with Don Kaye), International Federation of Wargamers, Gen Con mastermind, Lake Geneva Tactical Studies Association, and co-author of Chainmail.

Needless to say, he will be sorely missed. May he rest in peace, occupying a throne overlooking the Blessed Fields of Elysium, his faithful dice beside him.

This ends the nerd section of this post.

As I mentioned in my introduction paragraph, I didn’t really catch much of the news this week. I did, however, notice two blows to the American political scene.

First, Sen. Hillary Clinton won strong enough support to keep her a definite factor in the Democratic nomination race.

Ouch. How could you do this to the rest of us? Ohio, Texas - I’m ashamed of you! Rhode Island? You people are asking to be pushed off into the Atlantic!

In all seriousness - she claims to “know and love” Texas. Remember, the state that gave us George W. Bush? Sure, she loves Texas. Like I love her. Or Bush.

Second, Sen. John McCain has the Republican nomination. Nomination. This means he has the support of roughly half of the citizens of the U.S. right now - scared? This is the man who wants to be at war. Wants to be fighting, killing, ruining lives, displacing families - and not just the people of Iraq, but Americans too. Do we really want him sitting at the controls?

I think not.

That’s all for now - I’ll write again soon. And I won’t use so many - dashes.