Halloween and the New Star Wars

Only natural to consider the combination of Star Wars and Disney on this night of nights:

And, yes, those are Canadian mickey mouse ears....

The Corruption Tax

The investigation into the Montreal construction-corruption industry has implicated the Mayor.  Shocking?  Nay.  Excuse me, non.  I love that the Mayor's lawyer is now trying to challenge the witness.  That is going to keep him in business because it is not about challenging one witness  but the stream of witnesses.  So Mayor Tremblay is avoiding various appearances.  That makes him a gutless weenie.  If he is innocent (ha!), he should stand up for himself.  If he is not, then, well, suck it up.

The timing, of course, could not be worse, as Tremblay is proposing a tax hike. Since the government seems to be utterly corrupt, wasting huge amounts on crappy infrastructure programs, one would think that instead of raising taxes, the city could just agree to waste less of it.... at least while the corruption investigation is going on.

Tremblay is a disgrace, but he is not alone--this is a long term problem touching all of the major parties.  But the good news is that we can focus on nationalism in the next election and ignore the countability problems, right?

Disney Stars/Star Disneys Continued

I posted yesterday my preferences for which pieces of the expanded universe made sense possible directions for the new Disney Star Wars effort.

This post here does a nice job of raising some issues about my speculation and suggesting some general rules of thumb (more women, please).  I also like John Scalzi's take.

The reality is that we have no idea what will happen.  We should set our expectations on medium.  Disney has done a very good job with Marvel and Pixar properties, the Star Wars universe has heaps of potential, and so on.

The big question is how much did Disney have to promise to Lucas--use his old ideas, keep the old canon, or just sally forth bravely and boldly?  I don't know.  So, we can have several years of speculation before the big movie hits in 2015.  I know I will see whatever is produced.  I am an optimistic sucker. 

The Future of Star Wars

Perhaps my twitter feed reflects the greatest selection bias in my life as it became instantly obsessed with the next Star Wars movie(s) with Disney's purchase of Lucasfilms.  Of course, Howard the Duck 2 jokes also occurred, but now I have to ponder the American Graffiti remakes or do I?  Hmm.

Anyway, the discussion online focused mostly on which parts of the expanded universe canon would provide the stories for the new movies: the stuff that happens long, long ago, hundreds if not thousands of years before the Skywalkers that we have come to know and love or hate; the stuff that happens before, during, after the prequels (a reboot would be lovely, yes?); the stuff immediately after Return of the Jedi; or the stuff that happens after that.

Alyssa Rosenberg reviews some of the possibilities, arguing that the Thrawn trilogy would be best, that Rogue Squadron would be second best (with her so far), the Yuuzhan Vong would be good too (wrong); Legacy of the Force would be fine (ick), and the various non-series would be of mixed value. 

Ok, spoilers below if you have not read the books:

New Guy Same as the Old Guy

Canada has a new military chief and he kind of sounds like the old ones despite being an air force kind of guy.  Check out my latest at CIC.

Compare and Contrast

The Globe and Mail had Canadian ex-pats list a series of things that the US government does better than the Canadian (just government, so we cannot focus on crappy TV ads during major sporting events or the painfully excessive focus on hockey)), and Jacob Levy prompted me to blog about it.  Again, I am a sucker for a troll (although Jacob is more elf than troll). I find this challenge far easier than another one on facebook--name one thing that Romney would do better than Obama (or if you are a Romney fan, which I am clearly not, then one thing Obama would do better than Romney).

The article was about Canadian ex-pats living in the US, and how the US is better, so I should and will write the reverse--what Canada does better than the US.  However, I cannot help but comment on the list that was in the paper first and what it missed. 

What did the Canadian ex-pats list?

• US selects Senators better.  Yes, appointments suck.  But US Senate has a few problems, including tyranny of the minority (abuse of filibuster), giving too much power to states with few people which means that farmers end up having far more power than they should, and the whole expensiveness of campaigns that is endemic and epidemic.  
• US Postal system.  Indeed, Canada Post seems to operate by ox-cart and does not buy into the whole deliver no matter what the conditions (unlike the schools which close rarely).
• Respect for nature and history?  Hmmm.  National Park Service does rock, the museums on the Mall are fantastic, but these things do get politicized just a bit.
• The lack of party discipline.  Yes and no.  I do want my representative to represent as opposed to be a stooge for the party, but it does facilitate pork-barrel politics.  I guess I have to prefer non-discipline since, well, I am not disciplined. But I see the pro's and con's on either side.
• Universities: US has a better range from elite and small to big and wide.  Sure.  But as someone with a 16 year old, the Canadian model is much cheaper and thus more attractive right now.  Still, McGill as an elite Canadian school had way too many huge classes and big ones even for seniors.  The Liberal Arts college is a big American strength.

What did these Canadians miss?  MEANS-TESTING.  One of the big Canadian problems is the insistence on equity so that a rich person pays the same tuition as a poor person, that the child care in Quebec is $7 per day for anyone who can find a spot, whether the parents are well off or not, which often means less advantaged folks paying more for the unsubsidized spots.  They also missed Mexican food--much better Mexican and Tex-Mex and Cali-Mex and whatever in US than in Canada.  But offset to a degree by plethora of other options (as the Avengers found out, shwarma is mighty good).

Ok, as an American ex-pat in Canada, what does Canada do better?  The obvious answer would be health care--well, sort of.  What is great about Canadian health care is you walk in, you get the care, and you leave without thinking about payments.  The waiting can be incredibly annoying and getting a GP can be tough (but I guess it is tough these days in parts of the US as well).  Canadian health care is not great nor perfect nor even really much better than the US for those who are insured, but family finances are out of the picture for the most part.

Accountability is better in Canada.  Really?  Ok, sort of.  I have deep misgivings with the powerlessness of parliamentary committees, but the comparison between Somalia and Abu Ghraib is startling.  The Canadians may have over-reacted a bit (and definitely got distracted over detainees in Afghanistan), but there were real consequences for not just the soldiers on the ground but all the way up the chain of command with generals being punished, with the Chief of Defence Staff being fired, Ministers of Defence were fired, and a regiment being disbanded.  Who got punished for Abu Ghraib? Some folks on the ground, the local commander but not the commander of the Iraq mission (Sanchez, who whined about not getting a fourth star), not the commanders above and certainly not Rumsfeld. 

I need to get back to work trying to get more Canadian grant $$ (where the public money is better than the US public money--NSF has a far higher rejection rate; but the private money in the US is better--Carnegie Corp, Ford Foundation, etc.).

What other issues do we dare to compare and see who does better?

Dissertation Defense Defense

Nice piece discussing the dissertation defense.  Great timing for me since this seems to be a fall chock full of them--the third and last is in about two weeks.  Sure, I will have a fresh batch in a few years (I think I am now on five dissertation committees at Carleton, one for each month I have been in Ottawa?!!  Not a sustainable trend)> 

The only point that I would add is this: students can have a rougher time in the defense if the timing is driven more by deadlines than by readiness.  Some students find themselves in situations where they must defend by a certain time, either because they got a job that requires a PhD and not an ABD (All but dissertation) or because their grad school has got a hard deadline.  I had a friend who was in the first situation--his last summer of grad school was not fun, at least if one goes by the circles under his eyes at the time.  The latter situation is perhaps more common these days as grad schools insist more and more on hard deadlines.  Of course, a student who runs into these deadlines has already got a problem or two .....

Anyhow, I do think the piece does an excellent job of defending a ritual even as I am usually skeptical of traditional things.

The Joy of Tenure

A friend (H/T to Will) posted this on my previous post, but I wanted to put it in a post to make it easier to see for all:

Of course, this is bit of an exaggeration ....

Conspiracy Theory Du Jour and the Rise of the Trolls

I went nearly four years from when Sarah Palin was nominated to be GOP's candidate for Vice President without really stirring up the ire of her fans.  At least, not in ways that I noticed.  But now I have started getting tweets from folks who are big fans apparently.  And they are putting out some bait for me.  Knowing this, I take it anyway.  Why? Because I have not been blogging as much and have been pretty appalled at the leaps of logic and stunning omissions of the latest stuff.

What is the latest?  That apparently Obama should be impeached for the events in Benghazi or for covering up the "true" story, whatever that is.

@smsaideman @dandrezner no one ever died in watergate. And Clinton's child's play. We DON'T leave our people to burn! We wouldn't leave you.
— Roarin' Momma Bear (@KarylHorton) October 29, 2012

The basic idea here is that Obama deserves impeaching more than Nixon and more than Clinton.  I would almost say half-right--that Obama's continuation of Bush's extensions of executive authority might make Obama more worthy of impeachment than Clinton who only perjured a bit in a legal process that little do with acts committed as President.  Almost. 

Anyhow, let's rank the acts and see which is most problematic (in temporal order so as not to give the game away):

• Forming a secret group of folks to undermine the 1972 election through a variety of tricks and dirty deeds, and then firing various officials who sincerely want to investigate.
• Lying about adultery.
• Being President when the US is not omnipotent.  

Hmm, seems like the first is the worst and the last is the least in terms of abuse of the office.  We don't know the full story about what happened in Libya, but the most credible tale of events is that there was a heap of conflicting information and the Obama Administration could not wait to make annoucements until there was certainty. 

Ah, but four people died, which means that Obama committed heinous acts far worse than Nixon or Clinton.  Hmmm, if impeachment processes kicked in because an American President got people killed, then what would the ordering be?

Elections Close to Halloween: Coincidence?

Brian MacFadden, the Sunday NYT Cartoonist, reminds me of a basic question: trick or treat!

Focusing directly on Halloween, his year, I did not wear my traditional cowsuit for the fall season game of ultimate closest to Halloween.  So, for the sake of nostalgia:

I do miss these silly folks even though I found fun ultimate in Ottawa, it is not quite as silly.

Ignorance is Bliss: Let Me Count The Ways

This ad makes me laugh, cringe and sigh at the same time:


The Democrat is clearly seen as being an inferior choice because:

• he has multiple degrees
• he was educated abroad and then continued to work abroad
• he supports cap and trade
• he worked in Washington (where I believe the winner of this race will also work, so experience is not a good thing, eh?)
• he threw an awesome party (what is wrong with corn dogs?).

I get why the GOP is playing up the guy's environmental credentials as being a bad thing, but the whole "ooo, he got too much education from those darned foreigners" is just appalling.  More education may not always be a good thing, but it is not a disqualification either for higher office.  And getting some perspective by being educated outside the US and by working in DC?  Jeez.

Ignorance is bliss precisely because more knowledge would indicate how much the GOP is betraying the interests of its supporters.

While I often complain about the inferior commercials on Canadian TV (the same Canadian Tire ad every 10 minutes or less), a key advantage to living here is missing most of the political ads during US election seasons.

The Best of Times, The Worst of Times

Today, in the Ottawa Citizen, there was a feature story about where to go in case of a Zombie outbreak and whether Ottawa would do well or poorly in such an event.  This story was tied to a Zombie-walk today.  Hence the title to this post--tis the best of times as the Z-silliness spreads like a virus.  But it is the worst of times, as I am buried in work so that I cannot spare the time to venture out to watch or even join the shuffling and moaning*

*  Is that as pejorative for Zombies as Palin's "shuck and jive" for the President?  Probably Not.

By Halloween, I need to:

• review a book manuscript (late), 
• review an article (late), 
• revise a memo to go the publisher to explain how my co-author and I will respond to the positive yet contradictory reviews of our book manuscript (confusing and also fits the title of the post well), 
• prepare for class on Monday, 
• write and post the paper assignment (very late), 
• start the new NPSIA blog (ok, overdue and going to be kicked down the road), 
• make progress on the massive (in terms of documents, not in terms of $) grant proposal, 
• write a batch of letters of recommendation.

Talk about trick or treat!  Again, I love my job and it allows me to a lot of fun stuff (Dublin and London last month, Phoenix in December, etc., but oy!  Anyhow, expect light blogging except for occasional whining.  It could be worse, Ottawa could be hit by a hurricane this weekend.  Good luck to the East Coast.  Oh, and good luck to those in swing states that have to endure a heap of political ads.  The end is near!  To the election season and perhaps to everything if we don't prepare for the Zombies.

Race and Reading the Results

We must be getting close to election day as people are now thinking about how to interpret the results.  Some are saying that if Obama wins despite failing to attract widespread support among whites (white males?), then it is not a real mandate.  One could, of course, flip that around--that a candidate who wins with little support among non-whites has a shaky mandate. 

Let's ponder this for a second--what is more troubling: a candidate who only gets 35%-40% of white votes or a candidate who cannot attract more than 20-25% of non-white support?  Given that whites are no longer a dominant majority in the country, failing to get support from non-whites means that one is not representing or at least not attractive to a large hunk of Americans.  And isn't alienating the least powerful who have lesser means of recourse less problematic than being not very appealing to whites, who are over-represented in the House of Representatives, in the Senate, on the Supreme Court, at the tops of government agencies and the heads of corporations?

Again, it goes back to this: we have a homogeneous party and a candidate that appeals to that homogeneity and a heterogeneous party with a candidate that appeals to a heterogeneous audience.  Why is doing somewhat better among whites so much more important than doing much worse among non-whites?  Isn't the President supposed to represent all of us and not just ... 53%  Ooops. 

One funny thing is that Obama will probably get in the aggregate more white votes and more white male votes than Clinton did because the population is larger and there is not a third candidate to split the votes. 

The second funny thing, from the standpoint of the research on ethnic politics, is that scholars such as Donald Horowitz have been advocating for institutions that aggregate votes in ways that make sure that winning candidates appeal beyond their ethnic group.  Does the electoral college have that effect?  Given today's demographics, it basically does. 

Ultimately, it comes down to this, if Obama gets more votes, then he has a mandate because non-white votes should count as much in terms of legitimacy as white votes (the old 3/5's rule was wiped off the Constitution awhile ago).  If Obama falls short of a majority of votes but wins via the electoral college, then the white man's rules set up long ago when only white males with property had a say will bite the white men of today on their respective asses. 

When A Party Goes Too Far

I remember the good, old days when the Republicans, in their opposition to abortion, would make exceptions for rape and incest.  They knew that however controversial abortion in general is, that there was a national consensus that women should not be forced to have children produced by rape or abortion.

But then the party seems to be captured by its very, very far right, so Akin and others are dragging Romney down by alienating women, by reminding people that the social conservativism of the GOP is not just about being a good Catholic or evangelical Christian but about reversing 50-100 years of progress.  Check out http://www.dayswithoutagoprapemention.com/.

Of course, these folks are pretty darned averse to reality.  I just got in a quick twitter conversation with someone who was quibbling with my take on Sarah Palin's latest utterances--using shuck and jive to talk about the President.  I engaged this person until I checked their twitter profile which referred to the Oppressed Majority.  Oh yeah, whites are very oppressed in the United States.  Sure.  Well, as a white guy who grew up in the US, I cannot say that I have been oppressed for my whiteness or my male-ness.  Anyone who claims that white men are oppressed in the US is so divorced from reality that they are not worth engaging.  

So, this song goes out to the retrograde GOP who find themselves alienating not just a minority such as African-Americans or Hispanics but a majority--women:

Considering the Challenge

So, our favorite (meaning least favorite) non-expert on politics (who will go un-named here so to avoid giving him unnecessary hits on the web) provided a bounty of $5 million to anyone who can dig up President Obama's college transcripts and passport.  Besides yet another unfortunate moment where the media pay attention to an uber-hack who is a specialist in gaining attention for himself no matter how little substance he brings to the table, it raises the question of what he would hope to find?  Bad grades, thus confirming suspicions that this very smart, very articulate, very studious president made his way through life via affirmative action?  What about the passport?  That he traveled abroad?  I think we know that. 

Of course, even if such information existed, this is not quite the October shocker that he would be hoping for because one of the powers of incumbency is to make far less relevant one's distant track-record.  Draft-dodging and Vietnam protests mattered in 1992 for Clinton, but in 1996?  Nope, it is the most recent four years that matter most for any incumbent running for re-election. 

Still, given that Obama clearly is quite capable and probably did very well in college without much affirmative action along the way, what embarrassing information could we find on his college transcript?

• Obama took "Cultural Relevance of Star Trek".  Oh, that was me.  Never mind.
• Obama got a C in gym, as he was downgrading for only shooting 3 pointers?
• Obama took some courses in an area called "Liberal Arts."  Really!?  Gasp!
• Obama got an A in a class where they had to read Marx, thus proving that Obama is a Marxist.
• Obama got an A- in macroeconomics, proving that he actually does not know everything about the national economy.
• Obama did really well in Chemistry, so he might just be able to make meth.
• Obama aced a course on religion, which means that he might actually believe that there might be more than one way to worship.
• Obama learned French in college, making him likely to be a cheese-eating surrender monkey.
• Obama did well in Drama, which means that everything he says is a lie.

What is on his passport that could be incriminating?

• That Obama traveled beyond the borders of the US so he is not entirely ignorant of the world around him?  How embarrassing?
• That Obama visited France, making him more likely to be a cheese eating surrender monkey?
• That Obama visited a country where there are some Muslims, confirming his secret Muslim-ness?
• That Obama prefers Euro-Disney to the parks in the US, making him a traitor, violating the very fabric of Americana?
• That Obama has only been to Israel a few times, rather than visiting every year since that is where Mecca is (hey, The Donald is not a good geography student)?
• That Obama visited China so he must be the Manchurian candidate?

Of course, Stephen Colbert is on top of this (hee, hee):

For a donation of $1 million to the charity of Trump's choice, the blackmailing billionaire must submit his mouth to a dipping from Colbert's balls.

"Nothing would make me happier than to write this check," said Colbert. "And nothing would make America happier than have something going into your mouth than coming out of it."

Token Post on a Busy Day

After the last game of the fall ultimate frisbee season, we had beers at a local pub (see beer tangent below), and we ended up talking US politics.  I knew before but the math really hit me (must have been the beer): Obama is going to going to get super-majorities of the votes of Hispanics and African-Americans AND he is way ahead among female voters.  So, it seems that white males will have to vote overwhelmingly for Romney and turn out far more.

Then a twitter friend mentioned #voterfraudfraud.  Yes, I know and have long known that the GOP is trying to offset the Democratic advantages of being a big tent with multiethnic/multiracial/multireligious/pan-gender/multi-sexuality constituencies via voter suppression.  Still, voter suppression should not yet show up in the polls which make this race kind of even.

I would still bet that the GOP will be increasingly marginalized in future elections as the demographics continue to shift against them unless the party learns to reach out to non-white folks and non-male folks. 

Or they can keep talking about rape in the most offensive ways possible. 

I am a Millionaire?

Check out the US census data on education:
[Source: U.S. Census Bureau]

Ok, life time earnings....  But, of course, this is if you get a tenure track position ....  So, I would prefer to see a chart that did a probability estimate or a range of incomes depending on outcomes...

Bad History, Bad Geography

Romney apparently convinced enough people that he didn't suck last night.  Well, that is because Americans:
(a) don't care about foreign policy;
(b) don't know history;
(c) don't know geography;
(d) all of the above.

It is well established that foreign policy tends not to sway the voter.  So, perhaps voters might not care that much so last night's Mitt-tastrophe.  So, it does not count for much.

Or, it could be that Americans are easily impressed by historical comparisons--US Navy is now smaller than it was in 1916.  So glad that Obama spiked that stupid comparison with his horses and bayonets line.  Yes, we still have horses and yes we still have bayonets, but when we measure American power, these are not relevant today.  Romney could be a bit smarter and point to the reality that a shrinking US Navy raises a question about the imbalance between capabilities and commitments.  That we either need to expand capabilities or shrink commitments (I vote for the latter).  But the 1916 Navy line is just stupid squared.

But Americans also must be ignorant about geography given Romney's line about Iran needing Syria to get to the sea:

 (H/t to  http://www.ericachenoweth.com for tweeting the link to this).  Iran may need Syria but for access to the Med?  Depends on relations with Egypt, does it not?  Just dumb.  But if you don't know that the Persian Gulf is next to Iran (and that Iran used to be known as Persia), then you might forget that Iran is already next to a heap of sea.  I guess all those previous naval confrontations recently and in the 1980s did not jog any memories. 

Of course, my vote is for all of the above.  Damn.

The song is wrong--not such a wonderful world it would be:

Speaking of CIC

Check out my latest post there--arguing that Canada is better off for being omitted from last night's debate.  Comment there or here.

Proud to be in the CIC Club

Last night, there was an award ceremony for Canadian Online Publishing, and the folks with whom I am associated, the Canadian International Council (at opencanada.org) did very well.  They won for best online only series of articles on the future of fighting for Canada and came in second in their category for best online-publication.  The roundtable, where my stuff goes, was a finalist but not a winner:

We also want to recog our #Roundtable team, finalists in the blog category. cc @smsaideman @rolandparis #COPAwards twitter.com/TheCIC/status/…
— The CIC (@TheCIC) October 23, 2012

As the saying goes, it is an honor just to be nominated.  And I am sincere--I am thrilled to be part of this great effort that CIC has been running, that I am in great company, and I am very proud of the work they have been doing.