|Friday, May 28, 2004
The Day After Tomorrow, We'd Get Sued.
South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone have been working on Team America, a movie in which all the parts will be played by marionettes. It sounds like fun, but as the heavily hyped disaster flick The Day After Tomorrow rolls into theaters, I find myself missing the film that might have been.
"It started when we got snuck a script of The Day After Tomorrow, that Roland Emmerich movie about how global warming causes an ice age in two days," Stone told E! Online last summer. "It's the kind of script where you know it's going to make hundreds of millions of dollars, which makes it the greatest dumb script ever.
"We planned to secretly shoot that movie with puppets, word for word, and release it on the same day. We thought that would have been hilarious, but our lawyer convinced us we wouldn't get it released." [Hit & Run]
6:23:55 PM Permalink
This could be the worst article ever written..[electablog]
It distorts what he says, accuses him of guilt by association, and doesn't address what he did say. The author doesn't even have the courage to put his own name to it.
1:34:45 PM Permalink
Map of (Simpsons) Springfield.
Amazing: Jerry Lerma & Terry Hogan have put a lot of time into creating a map of Springfield.
[nick gaydos > thynk]
"While the placement of most locations is arbitrary, many are placed according to where they appear in relationship to each other in specific episodes of The Simpsons. In some cases 'one-time references' to specific locations have been disregarded in favor of others more often repeated. Due to the many inconsistencies among episodes, the map will never be completely accurate."
1:12:36 PM Permalink
We are an empire, and we'd better get used to it. The Atlantic has an interview with Niall Ferguson, author of the excellent The Pity of War, which re-examined Britian's involvment in The Great War. I heard an interview with him on KQED
a few weeks ago, too, where he made a lot of the same points. And good
points they are. If we're an empire -- and we are in fact, even if we
don't know it -- then we'd better find a way to be good at it.
Unfortunately, those currently in power certainly aren't good at it,
and I think the liberals probably are too afraid of power.
say America is an empire, but an empire with no administrators, no
settlers, no direct rule, and with no imperialists. What kind of Empire
It's an empire that has all the functions of military empire, if
you like. It has the capacity to project itself in terms of force over
vast geographical distances. It's an empire that is remarkably adept at
spreading its culture globally. In that sense, it's an empire with
almost unrivaled military and cultural power. But when it comes to what
might be called imperial governance, it is an empire which, precisely
because it doesn't recognize its own existence, consistently
This term you use, "liberal empire," seems sort of oxymoronic. Can you explain the contradiction?
Well, it certainly didn't seem oxymoronic a hundred years ago
when there were self-proclaimed liberal imperialists in Britain,
liberals who saw the British Empire as a means of spreading liberal
values in terms of free markets, the rule of law, and ultimately
representative government. There was an important and influential
faction within the Liberal Party who saw empire as an instrument for
globalizing the British liberal model.
To these people, globalizing the British model was synonymous
with globalizing liberalism. They looked around and said, Well, not
many people have our combination of institutions. What we need to do is
plant the seed of this system in as many places as we can and make the
world suitably Anglicized. It's only a contradiction in terms if you
define "liberal" in a rather early-twenty-first-century American way,
meaning that you like to hug trees, or you have a fit if somebody fires
a gun in anger. My sense of liberal is the classical sense. Liberalism
stands for creating the institutions of political, economic, and social
freedom. And it's very obvious that in a dozen or more countries in the
world, there is absolutely no chance of those institutions developing
autonomously. These countries are either so under tyranny, or so
completely anarchic, that it's never going to happen.
...In a way, if you are the imperial power you have to accept that
people are going to hate you however you go about spreading your
influence. One of the problems Americans have is this desire to be
loved. Legitimacy isn't necessarily based on affection. It's based on
credibility. And I think what we're seeing in Iraq is just the latest
in a series of tests of American resolve and credibility. It's not the
hatred one should worry about, it's the contempt. The legitimacy that
the United States will achieve if it makes a success of Iraq will
outweigh the inevitable resentment. You need to be respected. And the
United States has a long way to go before it attains that respect, most
obviously in the Middle East.
His book on the topic, Colossus, looks interesting. It looks as if the KQED interview is going to be replayed on Monday, 5/31/04.
11:30:58 AM Permalink
Nixon's Greatest Hits
Check out this selection of Nixon's greatest hits. Jeez that guy was a slimy bastard:
"You know, it's a funny thing, every
one of the bastards that are out for legalizing marijuana is Jewish.
What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob? What is the matter
with them? I suppose it is because most of them are psychiatrists."
But you know what? I'd rather have Nixon any day than this shallow,
self-righteous, arrogant, sanctimonious, sociopathic guy we've got now.
I'd switch in a minute.
—Nixon to H. R. (Bob) Haldeman in May 1971
"I'd rather use the nuclear bomb."
—Nixon to Kissinger, a few weeks before he ordered a major escalation of the Vietnam War in 1972
"You're so goddamned concerned about the civilians, and I don't give a d—n. I don't care."
—Nixon to Kissinger in 1972, admonishing his aide about concerns over killing Vietnamese civilians
10:40:31 AM Permalink
© Copyright 2004 Steve Michel.