Saturday, May 21, 2005

Galloway Senate testimony PDF goes AWOL

Evidence 'missing' from Committee website

The website for the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs has removed testimony from UK MP George Galloway from its website.

All other witness testimonies for the hearings on the Oil for Food scandal are available on the Committee's website in PDF form. But Galloway's testimony is the only document not on the site.

"I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him," Galloway told the Committee.

"The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns."

Press representatives for the Committee had no comment.

Friday, May 20, 2005


Mayor Quimby: I stand by my racial slur.

Galloway Miracle


If you haven't seen or heard any of the Galloway testimony before Norm Coleman's evil committee you should check out the at least the highlights below. Or if you're feeling really ambitious you can watch the entire testimony. Why can't we have politicians like this in the US....oh wait...thats right, they just kill them here...

The Highlight of the Galloway Testimony

The Full Testimony from the BBC (45 min)

4th Edition

It's time for yet another edition of Friday Feelings.
So....whatever you want to discuss....

Thursday, May 19, 2005


Lisa: Dad, don't you think you're overreacting?
Homer: Don't you think you're *under*reacting?
Lisa: This conversation is over.
Homer: This conversation is *under*.
Lisa: Goodbye.
Homer: *bad*bye

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Final Star Wars bears message for America


Lucas wins festival trophy - and hopes his epic will awaken US to democracy in peril

The republic is crumbling under attack from alien forces. Democracy is threatened as the leader plays on the people's paranoia. Amid the confusion it is suddenly unclear whether the state is in more danger from insurgents, or from the leader himself.

It sounds more like a Michael Moore polemic than a Star Wars movie. But George Lucas, speaking as his latest epic was given its world premiere at Cannes yesterday, confirmed that Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, could be read as a parable about American politics.

read the whole article from The Guardian here

Film Review: Phone Booth


Phone Booth
2003
1 hr 20 min
Directed by Joel Shumacher
Starring Colin Farrell, Kiefer Sutherland, Forest Whitaker, Katie Holmes, Radha Mitchell

Plot: Stuart Shepard finds himself trapped in a phone booth, pinned down by an extortionist's sniper rifle.

Booooooo! That's all I can say about this one. Maybe 'ughh' too. I'm not exactly sure what the message of this film was supposed to be. Was the psycho guy on the phone supposed to be God forcing the sinner to confess his sins? I really don't know? It's basically a morality tale wrapped in the shell of a psychological thriller....and it just didn't work for me. I'm not giving this a 1 or 2 simply because it managed to hold my interest for the whole hour fifteen minutes it lasted. If I was basing it entirely on the message though...

MarxistGopher's Rating: ***(3 of 10 stars)

Mr. Burns: I don't like being outdoors Smithers, for one thing, there's too many fat children.

Antonio Villaraigosa Elected L.A. Mayor

Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa unseated Mayor James Hahn on Tuesday to become the city's first Hispanic mayor in more than a century, confirming the rising political power of Latinos in the nation's second-largest city.

After a lackluster term tainted by corruption allegations at City Hall, Hahn was turned out of office in favor of a high school dropout and son of the barrio who turned his life around to become speaker of the California Assembly and then a member of the Los Angeles City Council.

With 70 percent of precincts reporting, Villaraigosa had 202,861 votes, or 59 percent, to 140,416 votes for Hahn, or 41 percent.

"You all know I love L.A., but tonight I really love L.A.," an exuberant Villaraigosa told supporters.

Continue Story

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Film Review: Ocean's Eleven


Ocean's Eleven
2001
1 hr 50 min
Directed by Steven Soderbergh
Starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Julia Roberts

Plot: Danny Ocean and his ten accomplices plan to rob three Las Vegas casinos simultaneously.

I'll try to keep this one short, because I didn't feel there was much to say about this film. Not that it's a bad movie...in fact it was quite entertaining. It was just fluff entertainment. I thought it was a fairly entertaining heist movie with an unnesessary and annoying love story. The gluttony of stars was interesting, but I really don't like George Clooney or Brad Pitt. I just find them annoying in everything they're in. Anyway, I guess that's it. I don't have much to say about this flick. Overall, a good way to kill a couple hours, but I wouldn't put it on any 'great films' list.

MarxistGopher's Rating: ******(6 of 10 stars)

Homer: Son, when you participate in sporting events, it's not whether you win or lose: it's how drunk you get.

Monday, May 16, 2005

The British Elections


A guest post by Matt Carhart

Even though the blog master claims that politics is one of his sites principal themes, he somehow managed to completely ignore the 2nd most important election in the English speaking world. In light of this oversight, and because I am currently experiencing something of a personal “British Renaissance”, devouring all things British (remember the Avengers? I can’t wait for the world cup next year- go England!) , I decided to take a moment and present my analysis of the recent election. Since we are not likely to witness any sane, reasonable or legitimate politics in this country any time soon, it seems appropriate to examine British politics in order to fill the void and see what we are missing. I shall look at the three main contenders in the British election, the conservatives (tories), the Liberal Democrats, and Labour. I will describe the results of the election from each of the three party’s perspectives classifying each of them into the winners, losers, or neutral category, and then offer an overall assessment of the election and the future prospects for each party.

The Big Losers

Given the raw voting numbers and the number of seats in parliament they gained, it may shock many to discover that I am putting the conservatives in the big loser’s bracket. But a closer examination of the situation reveals that from the conservative perspective this was a deeply disappointing election. First, let’s put the conservative’s current MP (Member of Parliament) position in historical context. In 1983 when Labour was widely considered to have suffered a devastating defeat at the hands of Thatcher, Labour held slightly over 200 seats; today the tories hold less than 200 seats. In addition, because Britain does not use proportional representation, the tories are actually over-represented in parliament so their number of MP’s is not an accurate reflection of their support in the country. Most of their support comes from rural areas in England and like in the U.S. these places have more political representation than they deserve.

Second, the actual number and percentage (32%) of voters that cast ballots for the tories in this election remained virtually unchanged from the 2001 election that was clearly a Labour landslide. Moreover, in many constituencies where the conservatives picked up seats it was the result of Labour voters turning to the Lib Dems or staying home rather than the tories gaining significant votes. This means that the tories gains are tenuous at best and cannot be seen as a sea change or trend they can count on to continue in the next election. For example, the tory majority in Pembrokshire is 607, in Hornchurch it is 480, in Clwyd West it is 133 and in Croydon Central it is only 75. In fact, in Clwyd West if only 2/3 of the Socialist Labor voters had voted Labour it would have been enough to defeat the tories even with a large Lib Dem vote taking votes away from Labour.

All this news should be troubling for the conservatives. They faced a prime minister that had been plagued by scandals in his cabinet, an unpopular war, a deteriorating health care and education system and a Labour party seemingly divided over Tony Blair. This should have been the tories opportunity to take advantage of the discontent and win 10 Downing. Instead the tories watched almost two thirds of the electorate vote for center-left parties. The tories will certainly point to the seats they won as evidence that they are gaining momentum, but do not let those numbers fool you, the tories are still out in the wilderness and the quick resignation of Howard and subsequent infighting over a new leader indicates that the tories themselves know how far away they are from winning a majority.

Failed to win big but did not lose either

This position belongs to the Liberal Democrats. Again, on the surface this might seem like a strange assessment, after all the Liberal Democrats remain the third party in terms of members and votes in Britain, why are they not the big losers? In addition, the Lib Dems went into the election with high hopes of surging into the primary opposition party slot but only picked up 8 additional seats. Clearly, this is a disappointing result for Lib Dems who hoped to capitalize on the unpopularity of Blair and the war. For these reasons, they are candidates for the biggest losers in the election; however, it is difficult to put the Lib Dems in the loser’s bracket when you put their result in historical context. The Lib Dems were almost an extinct party in the 1980s but the recent election has given the Lib Dems their largest vote percentage and MP representation since the 1920s. Moreover, the Lib Dems gained nearly 4% in the popular vote, more than the other parties and it is only a lack of proportional representation that prevents the Lib Dems from having control of about 1/4 of parliament. Given this historic result it is impossible to say that the Lib Dems were losers, rather they did not win as much as they thought or hoped. This leaves the Libs in a difficult position. They cannot really afford to sack Kennedy given his high personal popularity and the fact that he did lead the LD’s to gains in this past election, yet it is not clear that he can make the LD’s into a primary opposition party. The LD’s have to hope that in the next election they can raise their total another 3-4 % (a realistic number I think) and that the conservatives or Labour drop down to about the same level, this will put them into the position they wanted to be in now, namely, poised to secure second status nationally. Thus, the LD’s are still looking at an 8 year strategy in my view.

The Big Winners

I know it is hard to believe but Labour is the big winner. Disregard all that crap coming from the media about a bloody nose and Blair being finished. The fact is that Blair and Labour have so successfully marginalized the tories that even when their privatization schemes blow up, the war turns unpopular, and Blair runs a poor and defensive campaign they still manage to retain a comfortable majority. If I were in the Labour party I would be celebrating wildly. I know that 67 is not an ideal majority but it is certainly workable and if there is one thing that I have learned from recent U.S. politics it is that being in power no matter how small the majority is an infinitely better position than being in the minority. Look at it this way, Labour fucked things up and they still won a comfortable victory. They are now in the enviable position of having 4+ years to fix things and reassert their dominance. Plus, Labour can ride Blair for a few years and hope things improve and then take credit for the improvement and if Blair fails they can sack him a few months before calling an election, blame him for everything and put forward a new program that might rescue them from defeat. Basically, Labour controls its own destiny now. They survived the challenge from the left and the right is still on its knees looking for its weapon. You can be sure that Labour will not take the LD’s lightly next time and if they can recapture those that defected to the LD’s it is almost a certainty that they will win again in 2009. Finally, as much as I dislike Blair’s policies, I admire his political skill and despite a lackluster campaign he showed after the election why he is the Bill Clinton of Britain. His humble apology and insistence that he will listen to the people was brilliant. Let’s not forget Labour is now on their 3rd straight term, the first time in history, and if they even make faint gestures to the left they are likely to see a 4th straight term.

Summary/Outlook

I think the overarching result from this election is that the tories are still in disarray, the LD’s are the clear voice of the left and that Labour remains ascendant. In order to reclaim power, the tories need a young charismatic leader and they need Labour to continue to ignore social services. In short, the tories need a good leader and they need help from labor to fully recover. The key to winning elections are the big industrial cities and London and right now they are controlled by Labour. Unless the tories can make inroads there, they will remain in the minority. The Lib Dems have the toughest decision in the wake of the election. It seems they did not take votes away from the tories as much as they had hoped so the question is will the LD’s move right to try and peel those voters off the tories or will they maintain their leftist stance and hope to further erode Labour. I do not see the LD’s becoming the primary opposition party unless it comes at the expense of Labour. In other words, I do not expect to see a Labour government and a LD’s opposition with the tories as the third party. I expect the LD’s will continue along their current path and hope that they can take votes from both parties in the next election. Kennedy is a solid but not spectacular leader, he will not hurt the party but he will not attract votes on his own like Blair did in 1997. Therefore, the LD’s need the tories to remain a joke and hope that Labour continues to struggle, this scenario might get the LD’s a better result in 2009 but here again they need help to improve. Labour, meanwhile, is well positioned to increase its majority in 2009. A reasonable 4 years of rule should help move some Lib Dem voters back to Labour and prevent the tories from gaining any traction. Unfortunately, Blair is likely to continue on with his semi-conservative policies that will likely further erode the British economy and cause more suffering. This is the recipe for a Labour loss in 2009, but if Labour can somehow come to its senses it can push its MP majority back over 100. I look for Labour to try to have it both ways, they will try to put more money into social services to blunt the left but they will proceed with privatization and useless security spending. I also expect Labour to attack the LD’s much more over the next 4 years than they did during the campaign. I know it is early and things can change dramatically, but in the end, I predict Blair will be the longest serving PM (breaking Thatcher’s record) and Labour will win again in 2009.

Now it’s time to celebrate the center-left victory with an English muffin.

Temple Joining MAC

Temple is joining the Mid American Conference in football only starting in 2007.

This is from a source on the Gopher Hole...so for what its worth.

Developer Doran running for DFL Senate nomination



Minnesota real estate developer Kelly Doran said Monday he will run for Senate next year as a Democrat, joining DFLers Patty Wetterling, a child-safety advocate, and Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar.

Doran, 47, described himself in an interview with The Associated Press as a "centrist Democrat.'' He said he supports the idea of a balanced budget amendment, to force Congress and the White House to be fiscally responsible. On other issues, Doran said he's opposed to President Bush's tax cuts and privatization plans for Social Security, and said the United States made a mistake in going to war in Iraq.

Doran declined to disclose his net worth, except to say it was a "healthy number.'' He said he planned to fund his race with a combination of his own money and fundraising. He has not held public office before, but argues people are ready for a different kind of candidate. "I'm not a career politician,'' Doran said. "Americans are tired of politics as usual." John Wodele, who was Gov. Jesse Ventura's spokesman, is serving as a consultant to Doran's campaign.

I don't know anything about this guy, but anyone who calls themself a 'centrist' and is also a real estate developer....I'm opposing!

Patty Wetterling is looking more appealing everyday.


Random Movie Quote

Bob Slydell: You see, what we're trying to do is get a feeling for how people spend their time at work so if you would, would you walk us through a typical day, for you?
Peter Gibbons: Yeah.
Bob Slydell: Great.
Peter Gibbons: Well, I generally come in at least fifteen minutes late, ah, I use the side door - that way Lumbergh can't see me, heh - after that I sorta space out for an hour.
Bob Porter: Da-uh? Space out?
Peter Gibbons: Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working. I do that for probably another hour after lunch too, I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work.
-Office Space

Episode III Script


Can you wait? Can you? If you can't, the Internet Movie Script Database has the complete script for Episode III! You can read the entire movie and ruin the whole experience if you want?! Can you resist? Can you? Will you...?

The Top 10 TV Shows of All Time!

Continuing the pop culture turn that The MarxistGopher Report has taken lately here's my 10 favorite television shows of ALL TIME...

#10 - Family Guy (1999 - Present)
63 Episodes, 4 Seasons
Yes, this is just a crude knock-off of The Simpsons. But if you're going to rip-off a television show The Simpsons is the right one. I don't know if this deserves the 10 slot but I couldn't really think of a show that does, so I went with a show that I really like and watch regularly.

#9 - The Honeymooners
(1952 - 1970)
162 Episodes, 9 Seasons
"One of these days Alice, one of these days." Ah, The Honeymooners....threats of spousal abuse has never been so hilarious! I'm sorry, but this show leaves other shows from the early years of television in the dust. I Love Lucy sucked! Plus this is one of the only shows I've ever seen that deal with class. How often is the major problem in the episode money? The terrible sitcoms of today are filled with attractive people in their 20's that never have money issues, and their only problems are relationships! (see Friends..ugh) This show definitely deserves to be in the top ten....and if you don't think so you probably have never seen the show.

#8 - The Dick Van Dyke Show
(1961 - 1966)
158 Episodes, 5 Seasons
This is the classic television show of the 1960's. Thought the constant singing and dancing got very annoying the show was otherwise very entertaining. I spent many a night watching The Dick Van Dyke Show on Nick at Nite growing up. And lets not forget the uproar over Mary Tyler Moore's capri pants. Wow, those are smokin' hot for 60's TV.

#7 - Saturday Night Live (1975 - Present)
586 Episodes, 30 Seasons
How many people have grown up watching this show now. It's a definite television classic! Dozens of stars made their name on SNL. I grew up watching what was my favorite SNL era, Adam Sandler, Chris Farley, David Spade, Phil Hartman, etc. Ahhh, those were the days...
It's not as good anymore, but SNL has had some great years.

#6 - The Mary Tyler Moore Show
(1970 - 1977)
168 Episodes, 7 Seasons
Okay, this is a GREAT show! …and the first feminist sitcom. A show about the single successful Mary Richards, who lives in Minneapolis and works for a local TV station, and deals with her many personal problems. A milestone in television! Not to mention that it takes place in Minneapolis. I always loved it when they talked about the Vikings or someone was wearing a Vikings shirt. This show also had some of the great characters in TV history: Mr. Grant, Ted Baxter, Rhoda.... This should probably be above Quantum Leap, but I promised myself that I'd get QL in the top 5.

#5 - Quantum Leap
(1989 - 1993)
97 Episodes, 5 Seasons
If you want to hear my thoughts on Quantum Leap go back and read the post that I devoted entirely to QL. After writing that I convinced myself that QL deserved a top 5 spot on this list.

#4 - M*A*S*H
(1972 - 1983)
251 Episodes, 11 Seasons
You've got to love a sitcom that starts out as a comedy and ends up as an anti-war drama, and replaced half of its cast in the process without losing its popularity. In fact, I like the later episodes better than the early seasons. I think I've been able to catch most these episodes over the years, as I was not alive for most of the shows run, and was an infant for the last years. I probably should have marked it down for that 3 hr last episode though...ugh, that was disappointing.

#3 - All in the Family
(1971 - 1979)
210 Episodes, 9 Seasons
If there was ever a TV show that could be used to teach history, this is it. In fact, All in The Family probably would be enough to teach an entire course on the 70's. It started out cutting edge and exciting and ended up with boring worn out characters and some damn kid that suddenly appeared out of nowhere. But this show is at the #3 spot for the first 5 or 6 seasons, not the last. No other television show has dealt with current political issues like All in The Family did. How I long for there to be another show like this in my lifetime...but we all know that isn't going to happen.

#2 - Seinfeld
(1989 - 1998)
181 Episodes, 9 Seasons
The show about nothing made it all the way to #2. Definitely the best sitcom ever made. The way the writing was able to draw together seemingly unrelated story lines in a humorous way at the end of the show was genius. Four more selfish immature characters were never related to by more people in the history of television. I, like every other man on the planet, consider myself to be George Constanza. It's too bad it was only on for 9 seasons, as it was definitely still strong and very popular....oh well, I still have the memories...and the DVD's!

#1- The Simpsons
(1989 - Present)
356 Episodes, 16 Seasons...signed for 2 more seasons.
Now, many of you may not have heard of this show, but it’s an animated series on this station called FOX. It's really and good show. If anyone's ever really bored and looking for something to do, I would recommend checking out this show....you might like it. (If you didnt know this was going to be #1 you don't know me very well)