No, I don't much care for Ratzinger. And why should I? A pope who was some sort of Nazi-Party apparatchick, who is in favor of the death penalty and does not believe in global warming. Have I gotten around to Ratzinger's being pope yet? Nevermind that Ratzinger's not only fallible but also kind of evil, a moldy-oldy joke I used in yesterday's "comments" section is still as fresh today as when Don Novello as Father Guido Sarducci first cracked it. With regard to sex, contraception and abortion, is there no one who can just tell this Nazi bastid: "YOU NO PLAY-A THE GAME, YOU NO MAKE-A THE RULES?"
But I digress. My little yarn goes back to August of 1995. A London metals-trader and I had flown to Cnoc to meet up with his best friend from university, a Jesuit school-teacher in Roscommon. We were to have a barbecue at the teacher's house and go on to Galway for the racing festival. A week or so earlier, Pope John Paul II had been diagnosed with cancer. I enquired of my Jesuit host whom he thought was the favorite to be the next pope. He said "I think Martini of Milan is as close to a racing certainly as you'll find in these things. The Church has to modernize if it's to keep any Western European flock at all and compete with the local religions in the Catholic high-growth areas of Africa and Asia...the Church can't possibly be harder than the Evangelical Protestants or Mormons. Martini's the right man for the 21st Century church."
The three of us strolled into the town of Roscommon in the late afternoon, drained a few pints of Guinness and walked over to Mulholland's to check the prices about the next pope. Martini was a tepid favorite at 8/1 and it didn't seem worth our while to tie our money up god knows how long.
Flash forward about 10 years. I am in a conference room at the Bellaggio in Las Vegas with my friend Donn participating in a high-stakes fantasy baseball auction. My phone rings. I answer it and hear a business partner's voice: "Kelso, I have two pieces of news to tell you and I'll tell them to you in their order of importance. Vicente Padilla has a sore arm. Pope John Paul II is dead." To this, I responded, "well, bro, I wasn't into bidding for Padilla anyway, he's got no fastball and pitches in a massive hitters' park, but this Pope business has me a little excited. Get me a price on Martini." Two minutes later he calls back and says "are you sure you mean Martini the Cardinal of Milan?" Me: "Yeah, what the fuck?" Him: "Martini's 100/1"." Me: "just start betting and don't stop."
A "chimney-smoke-free" week later the Papal Conclave holds a straw poll which Martini wins! Now, internationally, the bookies have Ratzinger a 5/2 favorite, whoever the Roman Cardinal who was the compromise candidate at 4/1, Martini 6/1, and 7/1 bar. Holding a tremendous amount of Martini paper, we arb it out so we win most if Martini wins, next most if Ratzinger wins, a little if either the African or Central American wins and break even if anyone else does.
The Nazi Ratizinger becomes Pope Benedict XVI. We make a fairly decent score. But somehow it didn't feel like a score. I wanted Martini, for the money and the vibe, even though not only am I not Catholic, I am also an atheist and worse still a philosophical, if not instrumental, opponent of the Papacy.
The lessons in all this I suppose are that the consevatives win an awful lot, and those Jesuits are some smart cookies.
He's more diplomatic about Obama than I am. He's smarter than I am. He's a far better writer than I am. But I'm not jealous in the slightest. Paul Krugman, 15 years ago a middle-of-the-road economist, is an indispensible progressive. Christ, he's a national treasure. Enjoy.
http://www.slate.com/id/2180178/pagenum/2/
I also happen to think the world of Michael Tomasky. I'm proud to call him friend, but it sure is odd that someone who wrote the definitive book on Hillary Rodham Clinton, believed the Obama hype. And, sorry Mike, when you told me that Obama was just right for a "post-racial America," was exactly the point at which I sent it in Parcel Post on Clinton for the nomination and against Obama for same. Being a tough-as-a-bar-of-iron Serbian-American, Tomasky surprised me by not plumping for his paisano, Dennis Kucinich. As far as whether or not America is "post-racial," I reckon Krugman, married to a Black woman, would have a better opinion. We'll know the results soon enough. I'll smile if I win. I'll pay if I lose.
Kelso's Nuts love you
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I keep trying to get my wife to read your stuff on Obama, but she won't and she's bent on voting for him in the NJ primary. I'm thinking of taking some old fashioned measures in her case, but her attitude is indicative of some appeal that Obama has that transcends reason.
Oh my dear Kelso, I am so glad we are reunited. Not that we were ununited, but it seemed so as not much visiting had transpired.
You know I am no fan of B16, but I must beg some clarification here. Well let me be clear for others who read this... As a living breathing practicing Roman Catholic I am not a fan of B16! OK, let's move on.
Clarification please? He supports the death penalty? This is absolutely not the case. So while not an apologist for the old geezer, I must differ with you here. In fact, quite the contrary, something that most American Catholics disengage themselves from.
And while I find the whole infallible thing a bunch of hooey, let me add this teensy dogmatic clarification... What it says is that the TEACHINGS of the Pope are infallible, not the Pope himself. Like I said, hooey and hairsplitting but the case.
Martini is the man and it breaks my heart that he is not in the big chair.
And yes, those Jesuits, they got the goods. Especially those Irish ones, oh yes indeed... With their intellect intact, their fine homes, their single malts and their astounding libraries. You've got good friends.
HM: There are often intra-family and intra-spousal political differences. I lived in Spain twice and had plenty of friends half of whose families were Loyalists and the other half Phalangists. My father is voting for Kucinich in the primary. My mother is voting for Edwards. Both plan to pass on Clinton in the general and while my father is flirting with the idea of voting for Ron Paul, he'll end up voting with the old "iron ass," i.e., exercising his right not to vote in the presidential election.
My 2nd ex and I differed in the 1997 Democratic mayoral primary: I went for Sharpton; she went for Messinger. It happened, in the 2001 general election for mayor: I voted for Green and she voted for Bloomberg. I think I was right in the former case, she in the latter.
The difference between these examples I have cited and what's going on in Casa Hungry Mother is that the Spaniards left and right, Kelso Sr and Kelso-mere, Kelso and Ex-Mrs.Kelso all had clear IDEOLOGICAL reasons for their choices.
Vas ist das "transcend"? If Mrs. Hungry Mother is a DLC-ite, then, NO PROBLEM. Obama's her guy fair and square. If, however, she self-identifies as a PROGRESSIVE, show her the facts and I don't mean show her my blog. I'm just a pub debater. Do, however, remind her of a few things. Obama ducked the Terry Schiavo vote. Obama got very, very lucky in the Illinois Senate race. He was well behind Ryan when the latter pulled out. The last contested election Obama participated in produced a 35-point win by Bobby Rush. If Obama can't even get close to Bobby Rush, how is he going to beat a Republican for president?
Show her Krugman's stuff. Show her David Sirota's stuff. Show her Katha Pollitt's stuff. Play some archived Mike Malloy shows or Sam Seder shows for her. Show her the NEWSMEAT or CARPETBAGGER REPORT sites so she'll see where the money's coming from. Ask her why Obama is every Republican's favorite Democrat? Show her Michael Barone's laudatory article on Obama? Show her David Brooks's. Remind her that the Senate works on the "Rabbi" system, and rather than choose the obvious Dick Durbin as his mentor, Obama picked Lieberman, for whom he also campaigned against Ned Lamont.
Google the name "McClurkin" and read together the articles that come up. Then ask her how a stone-cold homophobe could "transcend" anything? Every time I think of that, I wish I were gay so I could take my loathing of Obama to an even higher level!
Finally, do the exercise I recommend for everyone. Ask her to close her eyes, assume a relaxing yoga pose, take some deep, cleansing breaths, void her mind's eye of everything, and then imagine Barack Obama with White skin. Or perhaps have her keep the pictures of Kelso and Spartacus from D-CUP's list of "Liberal Blog Hotties." Our SKIN COLOR is not much lighter than Obama's is and we're both about the same age as Obama is. Now ask her in light of all that, IS OBAMA REALLY THE TRANSCENDENT CANDIDATE? OR IS HE JUST A DUMBER GARY HART ALL OVER AGAIN WAITING FOR CLINTON OR EDWARDS TO ASK "WHERE'S THE BEEF?"
FranIAm: I stand corrected with regard to Ratzinger's views (AS POPE) on the death penalty, although I do recall his being the first voice expressing this whole "innocent versus guilty life" argument the Republicans are using these days. Ratzinger certainly was quite the death aficionado in his youth, however!
My very intelligent not-husband (whom I will henceforth refer to as Mr. Riot) agrees with us that Obama lacks substance and is a poor politician. But he's really attached to this whole post racial thing. Mr. Riot thinks that it's an extremely important test of post racial America that a black man is elected president. Obviously, I disagree. He's all for Kucinich, just like I am, but he's talking about voting for Obama since Kucinich has little hope of even 3%. I've decided to respect his position (oy vey, he's meshuge) and not throw things at him. I did, however, ask him to please read your posts on the subject.
SuziRiot:
Much as it pains me to say this about a fellow Democrat and fellow Kucinich-supporter, there is something terribly racist in White people requiring Black politicians to "inspire." Why do you think I used that "suck my dick" reference? Generally, speaking I'm not that hostile.
The true test of a "post-racial" society is when White Liberals judge Black candidates not by some fantasy of Martin Luther King, Jr., but by how effective they are as campaigners and legislators. I can make a pretty good case that the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency would be a step back in terms of American race relations, whereas I feel that the day-to-day work that such Representatives as Lee, Jackson, Jackson-Lee, Tubbs, Scott, Hastings, Clarke, and of course Conyers and Rangel are very much a step forward to if not a "post-racial" America a "realistically racial" America. I'm tired of "stories": Colin Powell's "story", Barack Obama's "story", Condoleeza Rice's "story".
You want some real "post-racial" American stories? Read all about Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr., and Barry Bonds. Nothing "inspiring" there. Two Black men who grew up RICH in America and have succeeded at the highest levels.
If you can find the words coming out of his mouth about guilty vs innocent life I would like to see them, until then I remain completely unconvinced. And I don't even like the bastard.
He was a brownshirt but not ever a full fledged Nazi, but I don't even want to get into that kind of pissing match with you.
Again, I don't like the man too much, but I would rather stick with the reasons I don't like him.
Show me the money and I will stand corrected.
FranIam loves you anyway.
Now I must go back and read your endorsement page again.
FranIAm: I wouldn't call it the "money shot," but it's close enough.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/apr2005/pope-a22.shtml
Mr. Riot has clarified to me that he is NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA. He's voting for Kucinich. He just thinks that Obama is a better candidate than you and I say he is, but we know we're in the minority on this one anyway. My apologies for misrepresenting Mr. Riot in such an insulting way.
Yeah, Mr. Riot doesn't buy any of that "inspiration" bullshit. He's no fucking sap. He thinks electing an African-American is important for America, but not important enough to make him vote for the guy. So I'm somewhat relieved.
SuziRiot: If Senor Riot (I like that better) hangs with you, he's got to be top-flight, ipso facto and QED. I'm not surprised in the slightest he's backing Kucinich. Good for him. I wish I could. Not being a resident, I can't vote in a primary. I have all sorts of reasons for not wanting to vote in the general election which have nothing to do with the "counting" part of American politics. I would vote happily for Clinton, and I can't donate any money because checks and wires from Panama are reviewed by Homeland Security and are more trouble than they are worth to any campaign or cause. All I can do, therefore, is blog.
Moving from the didactic to the inquisitive, what is it about Obama's campaign skills that Senor Riot likes? What makes Obama a better candidate to Don Riot that Obama appears to us? Your man doesn't buy into the "inspiring" jive. He's together enough to be into Kucinich who truly is the anti-Obama. What gives? Is the mere FACT that there's a possibility of an African-American being elected that meaningful to him? If so, why isn't the propect of the first woman to hold the highest office in the free-world equally compelling from that standpoint? The first Mexican-American? The first Mormon? The first Libertarian?
I surely wasn't thinking that any Rubicons had been crossed when it looked for all the world that Lieberman would be the first Jewish Vice President. It didn't mean shit to me, nor did I believe that prospect said anything wonderful about the States. I preferred Martin Frost for House Minority Leader over Nancy Pelosi but because of his views and style not his Jewish ancestry. I don't think Nancy Pelosi's elevation to Speaker is particularly meaningful nor would Frost's have been.
If Senor Riot believes that Obama is a "good" candidate because of "good" views, I think El Senor needs to go to his room because there's chapter-and-verse as to why Obama's politics don't have a patch on Lieberman's. If Senor Riot believes that Obama is a talented campaginer, then El Senor needs to go to his room with no milk or cookies and definitely no TV or video games. Obama is a god-awful debater. He knows nothing about either foreign or domestic policy and listening to him try to discuss macroeconomics is more or less like listening to Yogi Berra dicuss macroeconomics.
I keep coming back to Obama's race for the House against Bobby Rush. Rush is a decent campaigner with a nice common touch and a bit of fire to him, but he's not in Clinton's league. How good a campaigner can Obama possibly be if Rush undressed him so badly?
There is a candidate in this race for president I actally do find "isnpiring." He's nothing special to look at. He doesn't intone about "Gawd," but he's got the "story" and the style. Being "African-American" is so tough? With a wealthy father and a blue-blooded mother? Try being "Serbian-American" with sweet fuck-all for money or status growing up.
I'm inspired by Dennis Kucinich, who by the way wins HIS House races by open lengths and they are contested every time.
Yet, if he believes it speaks well for the USA to elect an African-American president, what the hell's wrong with Alan Keyes? He's still in the race and his views don't differ that much from Obama's. I like partisan politics but I do not like identitiy politics.
All said, I'm sure Don Riot and I would get along famously -- certainly if he likes the Riot Gurrl sound -- and if the two of you ever find yourselves in CdP, please get in touch.
Oh no, I've created a monster.
Pobrecito Senor Riot (I like that better too). He does not think Obama is a good politician, but I think that MAY be why he likes him. What I do find strange is that Senor Riot has always been anti-identity politics in the past. I don't know what this is all about, honestly. I think he doesn't like Clinton, but knows Kucinich will not win the nomination, although he is still going to vote for him. I also think that he has not looked at Obama that closely because he's not voting for him in the primary anyway. But I'm not at all representing Senor Riot fairly, so I think I should just shut my fat mouth.
And yes I do think you two would get along very well. He's mouthier than I am and is a fantastically creative and intelligent human being. We want to eventually relocate outside of the US and someone was telling us that Panama is great for expats, so we're going to check it out. I visited once as a teenager and I liked it. (Although Canada is much more my style climatologically.) So if we end up visiting we will most definitely look you up!
Queridos SuziRiot y SenorRiot:
Now, I get it. El Senor favors Kucinich and essentially considers Obama to have no chance to beat Clinton, so he hasn't bothered to look at the record. That, I can respect.
Once again, I'll make the point that should the unlikely thing happen an Obama is elected President, having a homophobic, patrician African-American President is a sign of regress, not progress.
Panama's humidity is brutal. It's economy, quality of life, lifestyle, politics and, most importantly, it's arm's-length relationship with the USA make it ideal. Harper's Canada is essentially a kissing cousin of Bush's America. Bear that in mind. Also, bear in mind that the weather is brutally cold outside of British Columbia.
Post a Comment