5 Days a Week

That's how many days the House of Representatives may have work, if those rascally Democrats get their way. The new schedule being proposed would have the Reps in Washington by 6:30pm Monday for voting, and leaving around Friday at 2pm. Quite a difference from the work week adhered to last year, by a Congress that managed to work fewer days than the "Do-Nothing Congress" of 1948.

The new schedule is meant to make the House look more like a standard business, thereby causing less of a feeling of displacement. After all, when the standard worker is busy slaving through a five-day work week (sometimes more), why should the elected officials be able to work for three days (at most)? Still, many elder statesment, specifically within the GOP, don't like the concept of actually working for five days straight, with only two days off.

Early criticisms include that the Dems in charge of the scheduling are anti-family, because having to work Monday-Friday weakens marriages. There has also been rumbling that, by forcing more time spent in Washington, the Dems are weakening Congress overall. The line of thinking on that seems to be that increased workload at the Capitol and less time amongst the people who voted for you will cause quicker burn-out, and lead to less efficient lawmaking.

One could actually argue the point that Congress should have a shorter work week, provided that the short week turned into productivity. Not to say that the longer week will provide that either, but at least we know that the schedule held by the House of Representatives last year wasn't anywhere near enough for them to get their work done, as proven by the fact that they didn't do much, aside from pass themselves another pay raise and deny an increase to minimum wage. Still, is a longer work week truly the answer?

Perhaps it would be smarter to force Congress to actually be held accountable for the work that they were sent to Washington to do. Maybe establishing some sort of pay rate based off of achievements, as opposed to a flat-rate for all senators. Let's make Congress more like professional sports, with incentive packages, and possibly even signing bonuses for those legislators primed to take an early lead in governing.

Otherwise, we're just going to end up with Congresspeople calling in sick to work, because they just can't bear to face another bill that doesn't directly benefit them or their friends. And do we really need more elected officials acting? After all, that's what campaign season is for.

Those voters are just crazy

There's a new scientific study out, and it will certainly help fuel the fires of many who find themselves in disagreement (or sometimes outright disgust) at GDub and his administration. The study, conducted by Christopher Lohse, indicates that the more severe the mental illness in a patient, the more likely they were to have voted for the current President.

Of course, this will cause people to jump to the statement that, well, you'd have to be crazy to vote for Bush. We here at the CSM would like to put forward the concept that the only people who are really crazy are those that would like to vote for him yet again... in 2008. We know that he can't run for the office again (at least, not until 2012), but that doesn't stop people out there from thinking that everything will just go smoothly if only we can keep The Decider in office.

Back to the study, though. As it turns out, the connection between the severity of the mental illness and the proclivity to have voted for Bush wasn't discovered until much later in the process. Mr. Lohse was merely trying to gather a way of registering mentally ill voters, and gauging their awareness on things such as current events. Of course, it should also be noted that those who supported Bush had less awareness of the current issues than those who supported Kerry.

Ultimately, as Lohse himself points out, "Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader.” While GDub may not be the best leader this country's ever seen, it's hard to argue with the notion of him being authoritative. He stands by a concept firmly, refusing to budge, even in the face of facts pointing out the error of his ways. He firmly says how something will go, and proceeds to only change his stance when the winds of change blow favorably for him. He may not come out smelling like roses, but at least we can never accuse him of waffling on the issues.

Still, is it comforting or frightening to realize that the current President holds the favoritism of not only the religious right and big business, but of the more mentally ill portions of our society? Looks like it's time for the Democrats to start embracing their own brand of lunacy.

I hear Howard Dean isn't doing all that much these days. Maybe he should get together with Ross Perot...

And go to your room without dessert

The United States has taken a new tactic in its campaign to bring North Korea around to the GDub way of thinking. Now, instead of simply banning sale and transport of weapons and military supplies, the US is looking into depriving Kim Jong-Il of items such as iPods and Segway scooters. These luxury sanctions are aimed specifically at the North Korean leader, as the items being withheld are purported to be personal favorites of his, and yet are not widely available to the rest of the country.

Let's just slow down for a second, and make sure that we all caught what the US government is proposing. We'll be taking away Kim Jong-Il's toys, thereby beginning what could be termed the first-ever global grounding of a parent angry with the bratty behavior of a child. Not to say that the United States is truly the progenitor of the situation in North Korea, but it certainly looks like we've decided that, until KJI listens to us, he's going to be sent to his room.

And boy, just wait until his father gets home.

But honestly, is this really the best idea the United States could have put forth? After all, Kim Jong-Il isn't widely known for his mental stability, and not giving him free reign to his cognac and Jet Skis. Nevermind that these items will most likely continue to be recieved in North Korea from other nations, making the US motion somewhat frivolous. KJI has been known to fly a little off the handle in the past, and perhaps not allowing him to get his PlayStation 3 from the US could provoke another less-than-stable response from the volatile leader.

Then again, maybe this will work. Maybe after all of the attempts at diplomacy and sanctions, all we really needed to do was take away his toys and lock him in his room until he thinks about what he did.

Or maybe he'll climb out the window and egg the neighbors house, like so many troubled teens before him.

That's a lot of books

GDub, the Great Decider of America, is already looking into ways to start trying to rebuild his shattered Presidential legacy. How better to do that than to start looking into financing to build your very own legacy library. And with the current price tag estimated at being somewhere around $500M, supporters are scrambling to gather the donations needed to get construction going.

Of course, what better way to symbolize the waste and decadence experienced by the elite over the last six years than with a legacy library with a cost higher than any previous Presidential library. The library is being planned to go onto the campus of SMU in Dallas, and draw contributions from donors ranging from $25,000 to $20M.

But that's not all. After all, why simply have a library built in your honor, when you can also make sure to endow it with enough money to have scholars and historians write favorably about a time in history that many are already having trouble looking back on without losing a piece of their Thanksgiving meal.

Of course, the money will come pouring in. Partly because, somehow, GDub is still ridiculously popular through most of Texas (Austin gets a pass for having some sense). SMU will benefit from the library. And, possibly most important of all, the donors will all be able to remain anonymous. True, The Decider is faced with trying to raise the money in a political climate which was less than favorable to the GOP, but, well, as we all know from Stephen Colbert, "reality has a well-known liberal bias". Why should reality stand in the way of yet another of GDub's dreams?

Yet, one question rankles. If the money is raised to get this building project off the ground, aren't there better ways of spending it? Say, perhaps, getting a Commander in Chief to stop reading Curious George books, and actually teaching him that Green Eggs and Ham isn't the pinnacle of literary accomplishment?

Course, what do I know? I don't have my own library.

After this, we'll tackle unemployment. Then a nap.

Thanks to the USDA, there will no longer be any hungry people in the country. Now, before we all get excited about the concept of plentiful food for everyone, we need to realize that what's actually happening is the federal government is simply dropping the word "hungry" from their vocabulary. This is due to a survey conducted by the USDA that simply didn't "have a measure for that condition."

The recent obliteration of "hungry" from the government's vocabulary follows trends over the course of the past few years where food-assistance programs have been cut, and the number of Americans who feel that they don't have enough money to purchase the food they need to survive has gone up. But thankfully, those people will no longer have to go hungry. Now they will be described as having "very low food security". That should certainly make them feel better when they're trying to figure out exactly how to make that box of store brand macaroni and cheese last for a week with a family of four.

Part of the problem, of course, is that our current administration seems to actually be gullible enough to believe that, if you simply change what words are used, you can change the condition. They can now add "low food security" to the list of terms that has been applied to change the perception of a condition without changing the condition, much like "insurgency" and "mandate".

Now that the USDA has come forward and removed "hungry" from the government vocabulary, maybe we can get started on some of those other terms that we don't like much either. After all, if we get them quickly enough, then the homeless will only need to make new signs that say "Job security deficient. Low food security. Will work for improved financial standing."

Oh, wait. I'm sorry. I should have referred to them as "shelter-impaired".

They need to talk

It happens in the vast majority of good relationships. Eventually, things turn sour, and there is a difference of views on a certain key point. For some couples, the conversations turn sour with the subject of marriage. For others, problems arise when one person hogs too much of the television viewing schedule. And for still others, it all comes down to how the neighbors should be treated.

It appears that the third option listed above is starting to pave the way for GDub and his heterosexual foreign ally Tony Blair to finally need to start opening the lines of communication with each other. After all, if they can't talk and work out their differences, a break-up is imminent, and it would leave Iran as the other woman.

See, GDub firmly believes that Iran is not going to pay attention to what the world (translation: his office) has been telling it, and therefore believes that isolation is the course to follow. Blair, on the other hand, thinks that you can do more with honey than with vinegar, and thinks it might be time to start thinking of partnering up with the Iranian government to achieve a peaceful resolution. It's the international equivalent of Blair coming home with lipstick on his collar.

If these two world leaders can't reach an agreement on Iran, who knows what could be next? GDub was theoretically making some headway in getting Blair to recognize the term "soccer", and Blair had moved forward, getting The Decider to use a napkin at the dinner table. But this potential affair with Iran could destroy the almost marital bliss that the United States and Great Britain have shared for the past six years.

It's time for the Americans and the British to stand up, and get our parents to stop fighting. We love them both equally, and we don't want to see this end up with a divorce. Hopefully they can work through their issues with counseling, and we can all move forward to a happy Thanksgiving dinner. But hey, if things continue to fall apart, we can rest a little easier, knowing the GDub's own political mistress achieved reelection. If it wasn't for Joe Lieberman, GDub would be spending nights eating pint after pint of Chubby Hubby, crying into his pillow, and waiting for Israel to return his calls.

This means no visitation rights

In a further effort to be somewhat different from every other blog out there, today we're not going to spend paragraphs (or multiple posts) talking about Britney Spears filing for a divorce from her baby daddy. We're also not going to talk about how the Democrats have made huge gains nationwide, because Jon Stewart already said it best. Instead, we're going to talk about Canada. Specifically, Toronto. Extremely specifically, Toronto's own Ronald Schulz.

Why are we going to talk about Ronald Schulz, you might be wondering? And, well, good for you for wondering. As it turns out, Mr. Schulz was recently sent to prison. For attempting to hire a hitman to kill his ex-wife. Schulz apparently was getting pretty tired of making child and spousal support payments, so he thought he'd take matters into his own hands, or, at least, the hands of a paid assassin.

That's not where it gets really weird, though. Now that Schulz is in prison, he figures that he doesn't have to pay any of that nasty child support that caused him to want to kill his ex in the first place. Why not? Well, he doesn't have a steady job, or a source of income. Because he's imprisoned. For trying to ensure that he didn't have to make his payments. Are you following all of this? Now, a judge is being forced to decide if Schulz has to pay or not.

Let me just make sure I'm fully onboard with this one. He didn't want to pay support. He attempted to get his wife killed. He was arrested and incarcerated. He is now arguing that being in prison prevents him from making his support payments. And the judge could take up to a week to figure out how to rule?

Listen, Canada, I know you hate being called America, Jr. Trust me, the way we've been acting lately, I can't really blame you. But when you can't figure out something like this, you prove yourself as our little kid brother. Where we have cases like OJ Simpson, you will have Ronald Schulz. Where we have our overpriced athletes, you'll continue to pay your baseball players in hilarious Canadian dollars. Where we have bacon, you'll have Canadian bacon. And lastly, where we have Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan, you will have them in less frequent doses.

Seriously, this is why we need a fence on both borders. We need to do everything we can to keep our culture and problems from spreading out beyond our lands and infecting our neighbors. Besides, they have better beer.

Haven't we seen this before?

Recent news coming out of Washington showcase that, once again, the current administration didn't pay attention to the full scope of intelligence that it had before itself. Back in 1999, the government conducted a series of secret war games, called "Desert Crossing", to simulate what might happen in Iraq should there be a military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power. The results were fairly astounding, especially given the notion that not enough troops were sent to Iraq in the first place.

Of course, the US has, at peak, placed around 160,000 troops on the ground in Iraq, with a standing force of over 140,000. However, the results of "Desert Crossing" show that a failed Iraq state was likely even if we had sent over 400,000 troops. Obviously, it's not just numbers and bodies. Nevermind that we're quickly closing in on 3,000 deaths since the beginning of this conflict, something that GDub refers to as a "comma in history".

With the recent editorial in the Military Times calling for the resignation of "Gin" Rummy, the President and his press monkey have come out and stood their ground, with Snowjob even saying that "everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts." What Mr. Snow, and much of the GOP, seems to be forgetting, is that this entire conflict has been built on the basis of "facts" only held by GDub and his cronies. "Facts" that were later proven to be reprehensibly incorrect. The war was launched to stop al Qaeda, even though the fact of the matter is that Iraq and the Taliban had no strong connections until after we made our presence known. We were presented with the "fact" of WMDs, and then told that there never were WMDs in Iraq, but that it was simply a made-up justification for the fighting. We were given the "fact" that the mission had been accomplished, while soldiers continued to die and sectarian violence continued to increase.

And now we are presented with this new fact, and the knowledge that the facts and possibilities brought up through the exercise known as "Desert Crossing" were ignored beyond the shadow of a doubt. With an election coming up tomorrow, and "facts" being bounced around by candidates from both parties, is it any wonder that the American people continue to feel more informed through programs such as The Daily Show? After all, at least Jon Stewart admits that he's stretching the truth for humor.

War is hard

GDub recently was asked a few questions regarding troop levels and the state of the Iraq war. The Decider made it clear that his commanders have not specifically requested any more troops than they already have, saying that the number currently in Iraq is "what they can live with." He followed that up by saying that "it's hard... to tell" if troops will still be in Iraq when he leaves office, over two years from now.

People are, of course, immediately leaping to the attack, pointing out that GDub's statement is an admission that he has no actual plans for when and how to wrap-up the combat going on in Iraq. Defenders are quick to say that the Decider can't tell yet, because a large number of permutations to the situation could happen between then and now, and it's too early (and dangerous) to make firm plans, especially in the middle of an election year. True, GDub isn't losing his throne of power for another couple of years, but he could see his base eroded by significant Democrat wins across the nation.

I'm just going to point out that whether or not troops will still be in Iraq is not the only thing that GDub finds "hard to tell". He also has a hard time figuring out how Jack Abramoff didn't get lesser charges, how exactly to inappropriately touch or speak to foreign ambassadors and dignitaries, and why his approval rating is so low. Other things that the Decider has a difficult time figuring out include the ingredients for a peanut and jelly sandwich, and whether or not his shoes are tied. He has huge problems with this last problem when wearing loafers.

So in all fairness, with regards to a situation that's highly volatile, and with a chimp waiting to push buttons behind the scenes, it's probably not a bad idea that he isn't sure how long the troops will be there. I, for one, would be more concerned if he knew the exact departure date, because that, to me, would sound like the endgame had already been decided.

And we don't have time-travelling Japanese workers to help warn us.

And in this corner...

The campaign of Sen. George Allen just can't seem to get itself righted. It seems like every time they are about to steady themselves from the controversies that, admittedly, they've caused themselves, they are forced to start clean-up on yet another issue. From macaca to allegations of white superiority groups, Sen. Allen just can't catch a break.

Well, on Halloween, it wasn't Sen. Allen himself that delivered another knock to what may be his sinking campaign. It was a staffer. Of course, Allen didn't stop the incident from happening, but he wasn't directly involved. What could turn out to be a fatal blow to Allen's campaign came when one of his staffers decided to take a constituent, put them in a headlock, and then slam them against a window.

As for Mike Stark, the constituent who was assualted and will be filing a lawsuit, what exactly did he do wrong? As it turns out, he was trying get some questions answered. Questions that deserve answers, at least for the voters who have to make their decisions about Sen. Allen in about a week. But Allen's staff apparently decided that, just because something should be part of the public record, there's no right for anyone to ask about those things. And, instead of either answering or ignoring the questions, the best course of action appeared in their minds as a mid-level match on a professional wrestling program. Stark simply wanted to know about Allen's arrest (from the 1970's) and about his divorce (which has its records sealed). He wasn't prepared for a body slam against a window.

A quick note for Sen. Allen. If you want to save any shred of your hopes in this election, fire each and everyone of your staff that was present when this incident happened. Then give them jobs so you can fire them again. Then call up Vince McMahon and the WWE, because it seems like some of your crew may just be preparing to make a run towards gaining the World Tag Team Championship belts.

Horror finally strikes home

With just eight days remaining before people nationwide leave their homes to cast their votes (and the other 70% of Americans decide it's not worthwhile and stay home to complain about the election results), the Democrats have finally found something of a spine. With the campaign season almost over, it's finally time to start trotting out the ads mentioning that little conflict we've got going on over in Iraq.

Some of you may remember that we've been fighting in Iraq for years, almost since the tragedy in New York. Why? Well, obviously, because Saddam Hussein was a much bigger threat to our way of life than Osama bin Laden (who's still at large, by the way). Of course, we've spent those years overthrowing the system of government that the Iraqi people had, placing our own form of democracy in its place, and then sending platoon after platoon to replace the soldiers that keep getting injured or killed by the insurgency, which has, according to "Gin" Rummy been in its "final throes" for almost a year and a half now. I've seen monsters in horror movies die faster.

Obviously, the Democrats are trying to secure the portion of the country that feels the war has been improperly handled. They plan on running the ads attacking how the GOP has governed during the war, while working to eliminate GDub's theory that if you vote for anyone other than one of his personal supporters, "the terrorists have already won". Sadly, this is being left in the hands of a party that lost one of its Golden Boys in Joe Lieberman through his political affiliations, and yet will lose the election in Connecticut to said Golden Boy because they can't actually mobilize the support, or the brain cells, to get behind Ned Lamont.

This country, a place where, unfortunately, the terrorists have already won far more than we want to admit, is locked between two dueling parties. Yes, I am aware that there are third party candidates out there, but, honestly, the only parties that really matter in America at present are the Democrats and the Republicans. Unfortunately, one of those two is corrupt, and the other has no sense of direction. I leave it to you to determine which is which.

1...2...26...27...7...8...

God bless Tony Snow, so that he knows that someone does. Apparently the Snowjob needs to go back to remedial math classes. Of course, by remedial, we do mean the classes where they teach counting. The White House Press Secretary just can't seem to figure out how many times The Decider used the term "stay the course".

Nevermind that doing a Google search of White House transcripts yields 100+ results. Also nevermind that Countdown with Keith Olbermann was able to discover 29 separate instances of that particular phrase being used. After GDub insisted on Sunday that he's never been "stay the course" with regards to the War in Iraq, Snowjob picked up on that, and insisted that the words were never uttered.

Under scrutiny, Tony Snow has gone and revised his original estimate. Of course, given that his previous job was working with faulty definitions of "fair" and "balanced" on FOXNews, we shouldn't be surprised that he's having trouble grasping vague concepts like numbers. Snow has recently admitted that GDub may have said those exact words a few times. Approximately eight times, by the White House count. This is a far cry from the 29 that Keith Olbermann discovered, and isn't anywhere near spitting distance of what a Google search can pull up.

Perhaps this should serve as a wake-up call to the GDub administration (not that they've paid attention to any of the other calls they've gotten during their six years). When you're press secretary needs to use his fingers to count up the number of times something was said, and he still gets it wrong, maybe you should look into a new press secretary. After all, putting a PR spin on things will never work if the information can be debunked almost as soon as it's made available.

Or maybe it's time to reanalyze "No Child Left Behind". While Snowjob isn't a product of that program, his inability to count all the way up to 29 makes one wonder about the education priorities of the administration as a whole.

Oh, and Tony? It's ok. Einstein failed at math once, too.

You know what they do to messengers

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is trying to offer some helpful advice to all of the GOP hopefuls running for election this coming November. He suggests that, to help win the election, the candidates should focus on things like tax cuts, and the drop in the price of gas.

Although it wouldn't seem like it needed to be said, Frist is also suggesting that GOP candidates don't talk about the war in Iraq, or the "terror issue".

Well, duh. After all, when you're running for office, and belong to a certain political party, why would you even consider bringing up points of conversation where it's fairly obvious your party leaders have made mistakes. Severe mistakes. Of course you should focus on the good things that you're party has done. It's almost as though Frist is going to a fraternity house and saying, "Guys, when advertising your next party, feel free to talk about the beer and games that are played. But, if I were you, I wouldn't mention the hazing or date rape."

The Democrats, of course, should be jumping all over this concept, if they want to win the Congress this November. After all, if the Senate Majority leader is telling his constituents to avoid talking about a certain issue because of how the GOP has handled it, why not make a different tactic on those issues a cornerstone of your campaigns? Of course, the Democrats, at least in Minnesota, are too busy defending themselves against some fairly outrageous claims (and some accurate ones, like the desire to repeal the tax breaks on the extremely wealthy) to even consider going on the offensive with something like this.

Which, of course, means that we're left waiting until the election, as one party doesn't want to talk about some of the biggest blights on our country in recent decades, and the other party is too dazed by all of the wadded-up pieces of Kleenex thrown their way to figure out how to mobilize even their plastic army figures.

But hey, thanks to Minnesota Public Radio, I can track my home election results from the comfort of my own blog. So can you, if you want. Hooray to widgets.

As a button

The race for Senate in New York is getting more interesting, as it steps further and further away from anything resembling politics. Republican John Spencer, who is running against Hillary Clinton, recently disparaged his opponent in the New York Daily News. How, you might ask? By alluding that she may have gotten plastic surgery.

Hillary, of course, responded, all the while complaining that the campaign has stepped to attacks on physical appearance.

Sure, the photo of Hillary from high school isn't terrific, but it was taken back when cameras were still being perfected. Besides, she had a much smaller penis in high school, and it's barely even noticeable in the photo.

For those at home wondering, yes, I'm joking. It's totally visible in the full photograph, just not in the published headshot.

Had Spencer focused more on the photos of Hillary at college, he might have had more ammunition to work with. Those pictures showed Hillary looking even more unkempt and unattractive than Chelsey Clinton did in her worst bouts of puberty. Of course, Spencer even minimized his own attacks by point out that Clinton "looks good now".

It's comforting to realize that, in a world with all the problems we've got currently facing us, including, but not limited to, North Korea with nuclear potential and Kazakhstan still worried how Borat could affect their reputation, we can see a political candidate step into the world of high fashion, and accuse his opponent of having once been anything less than attractive. God bless America indeed.

Presidential poker

No, we're not talking about Thomas Jefferson, John Kennedy, or William Clinton. We're actually talking about a president making reference to the card game. I know, I know, sometimes the double entendre is just too easy not to miss, but I forgive your enthusiasm for more sex jokes.

Moving on... apparently the Decider could really benefit from watching some of the World Poker Tour on The Travel Channel. Heck, he could probably benefit from watching any house game of cards that involves silly variants made up on the spot to benefit the dealer. I'm sure both of his daughters are fluent in the game, although they probably stick to the strip variety.

Why should GDub learn more about poker? Because, in a recent quote, talking about trying to resolve the issues with North Korea, Bush said "one has a stronger hand when there's more people playing your same cards." While it's true that, in negotiations, the more people supporting your views, the more strength you have, the same just doesn't hold for any sort of card game. It's like the Decider was trying to say that if you happen to have a jack-high straight, and three other people also have a jack-high straight, you've got a higher chance to win than if you are the only one with those cards.

To be fair, poker is a game that can be very confusing for a lot of people, because of the skill, luck, and intricacy involved in playing it. To be beyond fair, I think it's safe to say that GDub gets confused by playing games of "War" with people (the card game, not the sudden attack on foreign armies).

Maybe it would be best if he just stuck to playing "Go Fish". Unfortunately, then someone would need to convince him to leave his rod and reel at home.

Doppleganger Effect

Ned Lamont, in response to being labeled by the Joe Lieberman campaign as being in incredibly negative politician, has taken an interesting tactic towards trying to secure himself the election. Apparently, Lamont has dug up some archival footage to use in his most recent campaign ads. The star of that archival footage? None other than a younger Joe Lieberman.

The footage that Lamont is using shows Lieberman back in 1988, as he talks about the things he will do differently from then-incumbent Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. Of course, over the course of the next 18 years (exactly the amount of time Weicker spent in office, coincidentally), Lieberman wasn't quite able to stand by his word, and Lamont is looking to exploit that.

This can only speak well for the future of political campaigning. Just think, we could see a young Katherine Harris speaking out against the exact standards candidate Katherine Harris currently stands by. We could witness a childhood Barack Obama extolling the virtues of his hard upbringing and struggle for acceptance. And we could see Hillary Clinton from the days where she was still considered a woman.

The tragedy, of course, is not that this type of campaigning wasn't being used in 2004 as heavily. No, the tragedy is that, had we seen a younger, coke-fueled GDub used in a Kerry ad, it would only have served to support his already fractured policies and global initiatives.

But at least we have Tony Snow to remind us that the full blame for the North Korea situation rests with North Korea. To think that the Decider could have done things differently to affect the current outcome is just "silly".

Survey says

Oh, Florida. How we love your wacky politicians, and the things that they do.

True, for the most part "wacky politicians" refers specifically to Katherine Harris, the woman who single-handedly helped GDub win the election the first time. The woman who pledged to bankrupt herself if need be to win the election, neglecting to mention large piles of money sitting around waiting for her to grab should she glimpse just shy of six figures. The woman who has had numerous problems keeping staffers working on her campaign. The woman who has won the race for Florida's Senate seat.

But wait. Isn't the election not until November? How can she possibly have already declared victory over her opponent, Bill Nelson?

See, in the world of Florida politics, sometimes you don't need to wait for those nagging election results to come in. Sometimes, all you need to do is decide that polls actually determine the winner, and then move forward as though everything's already been predetermined. That's how it was done back in 2000, and by God, if it was good enough for GDub, it's good enough for Katherine Harris.

This, of course, means that Florida can now rest easy, knowing that they've helped pave the way to a late October that is missing negative campaign ads. If only every other state in the Union could just get on board with this philosophy. Why, if Florida can do it, why can't New Hampshire? Or Oregon? By following this simple procedure, we can feel secure that the grand experiment called democracy can once and for all reach an end result.

Or, we can relish the fact that opinion polls simply measure opinions, and that the election is still undecided.

Bored stiff at the Capitol

Representative Mark Foley (R-FL), who resigned on Friday amidst a flurry of questions regarding messages he sent to pages, has seen more of his personal life come out recently. Apparently, while waiting for a vote on the House Floor, Foley was texting away like mad, quite possibly using only one hand, in communications with underage former pages. The instant messages that Foley was sending were, while not sexually explicit, at least indicative of sexual desire.

Of course, Friday all that had come to light was some emails. And then the word that the GOP had actually warned pages about Foley back in 2001. Now the instant message situation, complete with information that Foley may very well be continuing to sign on to these clients under the same screen name, all while under investigation from the FBI. All of this leads to one question.

Is it really that dull to be a member of the House of Representatives? I mean, sure, I've watched it on C-SPAN a couple of times, and it was a great cure for insomnia on the television. But shouldn't being there actually make it a little more interesting? Doesn't the notion of leading the country and helping to govern it provide enough excitement?

And how did C-SPAN not get footage of someone furiously having cybersex? I mean, maybe they just had too much Strom Thurmond over their broadcast history, but shouldn't they at least have tried to capture something? Maybe for release. Just think of it. Representatives Gone Wild would be a great title.

This was classic Jerry Springer-era television in the making, and C-SPAN missed out. No wonder they always lag in the Nielsen ratings.

If you can't beat 'em

The government is trying a new tactic in the decades old war on drugs. Taking a page from pot-smokers across the nation, the White House is starting to place their anti-drug public service announcements on YouTube. In doing so, they're putting themselves directly into the viewing cycle of people who watch self-made videos featuring horrible karaoke, live-action translations of video games, and mash-ups of songs with Japanese animation.

The thing is, this type of campaign may work, because it's finally taking a medium that is one of the main focal points for the people directly affected, and addressing the issues. Of course, the PSA's still are a bit hokey for their intended purpose in many ways, but the simple fact that the government is trying a new avenue and approach shows that, in spite of everything else they've done under the current administration, they can learn from what worked and what didn't.

Of course, we also have to keep in mind that one of YouTube's favorite celebrities, and I use the term loosely, is someone who may have had a few run-ins with drug use herself. It almost makes you wonder if the White House is considering trying to put together a few new PSA's featuring Paris Hilton, in an attempt to bring around a wider audience.

Naturally, if this campaign works, we may see even more PSAs showing up on YouTube. Imagine NBC's "The More You Know" campaign playing on your computer while you're trying to find the funny video of the guy lighting his own face on fire with a flaming shot. Picture United Way commercials in place of watching Joe Thiesmann break his leg over and over again.

And just wait until the video mash-up of GDub with Paris. That'll be a real meeting of the minds, one for the record books.

It's a shame neither of them can read.

I can't believe it's not Kazahkstan

More evidence that the irony has died, satire is hooked up to a morphine drip, and comedy itself is closing in on its final laugh is the report that GDub will be hosting talks at the White House with Nursultan Nazarbayev, president of Kazakhstan. The topic of this discussion? British comedian Sasha Baron Cohen, creator of Ali G and Kazakh tv presenter Borat, due to Cohen's portrayal of Kazakhstan in his newest film.

While the Kazakh government is, supposedly, at least partially aware that Borat is a satirical creation, and that the character and the film are really more about exposing problems within the US and the UK, they dislike the film enough to want to meet with the Decider and attempt to get the message out about the real Kazakhstan. A spokesman for Kazakh has said that he doesn't believe that GDub and Nazarbayev will find the film funny. One can't help but agree, because Nazarbayev will not find the humor in a caricature of the Kazakhstani people, and GDub simply won't understand anything that's a couple of steps over a fart joke.

With the war in Iraq still facing severe criticism, the GOP in danger of losing the power they hold in the branches of government, and GDub showing lower approval than just about everyone whose last name isn't Couric or Federline, one has to wonder if it's really wise for the President to step into a controversy over a character and a nation that character supposedly hails from. And the Kazakh government could definitely choose a better candidate to help put a new glossy sheen on their image.

Either way, this is definitely a case of blowing things way out of proportion. After all, Cohen is simply making this character live so that he can joke about events he sees in the world. In a lot of ways, this makes Cohen no different than Larry the Cable Guy (although, in Cohen's defense, he's actually funny). And yes, "Borat" has been guilty of anti-Semitic statements. Generally while staying firmly in character, and generally those statements are directed at Cohen himself. It reminds me of a couple of things said by George Carlin. First, when talking about language, Carlin pointed out that there are no such thing as bad words, but that it's merely the context of the words and the intentions behind the person speaking them that provides their potentially offensive content. Secondly, Carlin pointed out that you can joke about anything, so long as the exaggeration is big enough.

Unfortunately, this particular event is going to be so ridiculous that it's going to be hard to make a joke that's funnier than the reality of the situation. All we can hope now is that GDub doesn't ask Nazarbayev where his horse-drawn car is.