You know, I understand (even if I don’t respect) the need to run against my city as a symbol of Things Gone Wrong, but it gets old. Especially when someone like McCain – who is more a Washingtonian than he’ll ever be an Arizonian – says ridiculous shit like this:
“It’s harder and harder trying to do the Lord’s work in the city of Satan,” McCain said of Washington.
What a hypocritical asshole.
No pro racing up the cobbles of Libby Hill this year, it seems. Last year, I joked that the U.S. Open Cycling Championship finally gave me an enjoyable reason to go to Richmond. Well, it looks like I won’t have to worry about enjoying Richmond anymore – the 2008 U.S. Open Cycling Championship that was scheduled to finish there on April 13 has been canceled, renamed, and moved to Providence, Rhode Island:
Last April’s inaugural U.S. Open road race was held in epic snowy conditions — and with nearly unprecedented network television coverage — in Virginia.
This year’s event is likely to be quite different. The 112-mile professional event has been moved to Providence, Rhode Island, on May 31. And while promoters are still negotiating a title sponsor and TV deal, they say the date and location change will soon make it a fixture on the domestic calendar.
Of course, at the end of last year’s race, there were plenty of people on the dais (including Virgnia’s governor, Tim Kaine) talking about making the race a fixture in Richmond, so take that last line with a grain of salt. It’s not clear why the race moved from Virginia, but I suspect it was a mixture of the low spectator turnout last year, fewer state support dollars available this year, and the small fact that the promoter lives in Providence. There’s been very little coverage of the status of the race, with searches turning up only an article in a Baltimore business paper regarding the fact that the race had been pitched to that city (among others). Ah, well. In any event, Virginia’s loss is Providence’s gain:
The race will start in downtown Providence, loop out around the Scituate Reservoir to the west, then return to the city for about ten laps of a 4- or 5-mile circuit[.].
So if you’re in the area, check it out. Great fun no matter where it’s held, I’m sure.
The above poster comes from London’s Metropolitan Police Service. It seems they’re not so comfortable with the idea of someone taking photos of them. Which is rich, considering the 10,000 cameras the Met has focused on the citizens of London.
And seriously, turn in a photographer who “seems odd”? In London? (Careful on your next trip, Gwadz) Just another ridiculous effort at turning photography into a matter of permission, instead of right.
(Image courtesy Thomas Hawk)
I’m in the habit of collecting examples of government attempts to control content on the Internet. Places like China or UAE provide easy pickings. There are plenty of examples from other places, but they’re usually couched in terms of voluntary filtering for “obscenity” – Australia’s latest proposal comes to mind. But this is something I didn’t expect to see:
Steve Marshall is an English travel agent. He lives in Spain, and he sells trips to Europeans who want to go to sunny places, including Cuba. In October, about 80 of his Web sites stopped working, thanks to the United States government.
The sites, in English, French and Spanish, had been online since 1998. Some, like www.cuba-hemingway.com, were literary. Others, like www.cuba-havanacity.com, discussed Cuban history and culture. Still others — www.ciaocuba.com and www.bonjourcuba.com — were purely commercial sites aimed at Italian and French tourists.
[ . . . ]
It turned out, though, that Mr. Marshall’s Web sites had been put on a Treasury Department blacklist and, as a consequence, his American domain name registrar, eNom Inc., had disabled them. Mr. Marshall said eNom told him it did so after a call from the Treasury Department; the company, based in Bellevue, Wash., says it learned that the sites were on the blacklist through a blog.
So, advice to everyone on the planet: make sure what you’re talking about on the Internet doesn’t bother the U.S. Treasury Department, lest they try and shut you down.
One of my best friends on the planet was in town recently, and at some point the conversation meandered to the bootleg movies on VHS tape that we wore out as kids. In honor of that, I present the following:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwBbMXYDsXw[/youtube]
That was his. The next two are mine:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyW9864AXVk[/youtube]
and
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufrCIwNk1zc[/youtube]
So much for miracles, eh?
Florida Governor Charlie Crist (R) says he’s open to holding another Democratic primary in his state. As you recall, the Democratic National Committee has (thus far) held to the position that no Florida delegates would be seated at the nominating convention, and thus Florida would have no say in the nomination. This was all done as punishment for Florida breaking the party rules by holding its primary so early in the year.
The Democratic candidates did not (technically) campaign in Florida, but Hillary Clinton won the vast majority of the (unseatable delegates). Hillary Clinton, in one of her less impressive moves, has been arguing that those delegates should be seated, couching a rather self-serving argument in terms of fairness to voters. So far, the DNC (and the public, I hope) hasn’t been buying that argument. Everyone knew (and agreed to) the rules before, and the consequences were clear. Now, I suspect that Crist is trying to throw Clinton something of a lifeline here, a means of legitimizing Florida delegates. I’m not so sure it would work in her favor, though, as I bet her majority (if any) would be much less than it was the last time around. Her camp’s reaction to this offer (which the DNC has previously indicated it sees as a possible solution) will say something about what she’s more interested in – the will of the voters, or delegates for her.
Update: Crist now denies being open to a new primary – he simply wants the delegates seated, which is certainly to Clinton’s benefit.
Hey, it must be true, since it’s printed in the Washington Post!
Credit to Atrios, who’s done a good job of highlighting this idiocy over the weekend. I present it here, in case any of my readers are still under the mistaken impression that the Washington Post editors ever deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén