Geek Alert

I'm not sure how I feel about this. The Max Payne games, are in no small way some of the best video games ever conceived. However, the word on the street is that this movie will be PG-13. Look, Max Payne can't be PG-13. It's not that I'm a sadist that enjoys watching people get blown up, but when it comes to movies, I'm a sadist that enjoys watching people get blown up. Ok, I'll be serious now. Max Payne is like Batman in sense that both stories are EXTREMELY dark and nihilistic. A PG-13 rating worked with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, because Batman doesn't kill anyone. It's the one line he will never cross. The same cannot be said of Max Payne. Max Payne's wife and baby were murdered by drug dealers. This essentially ends Max's life, and he is reborn as a creature of vengeance. He kills people. He kills them violently. A PG-13 movie just can't convey that. Also, what the fuck is with the demon thingys? Valkyries? In the first game, there's mention of the Valkyrie Project, but it's a military industrial project. It's not some kind of occult summoning of demons. I've read that in Max Payne 2, if you beat the game on the hardest level (which I will never be able to do) a new playable level gets unlocked that includes demons. I'm hoping this is just some sort of dream sequence. However, I fear that it's not considering that these things are featured so prominently in the trailer.

On the other hand, the trailer is fairly well put together. It certainly peeks interest in the viewer. I could make some kind of half assed excuse, but the truth is, I'll probably see this movie right away since I'm such a fan of the games. I think it sucks that the movie is PG-13, but since 20th Century Fox is running the show, I'm not all that surprised. Anyways, this has been way too long of post, especially since it's about a video game movie. I should be talking about Sarah Palin. Oh well!

A Night to Remember

Wow. What a speech! I've seen some great speeches in my 24 years, but I think that this might just take the cake. Obama was brilliant last night. I think I feel the need to try and match that speech by writing a very insightful commentary post. Why even try. I'll just note a few highlights that really struck me. In my opinion, Obama did a great job of defusing the "celebrity" and "elitist" critique that the McCain campaign has been so desperately trying to link him with. By highlighting his struggles growing up as the child of a single mother on welfare, I think it's pretty much impossible to call Obama an "elitist." I was particularly struck by the line, "I don't know how John McCain thinks a celebrity lives, but that's how I grew up." In the words of John Madden, Boom. However, it's really up to the media whether or not they will keep covering this line of attack. Since they know it's BS, they should leave it alone. Another highlight for me, as I sure it was for everyone watching the speech, was the bit on Osama bin Laden. As I'm sure you're all aware, McCain has said that he will follow Osama Bin Laden to "the gates of hell." Now, that plays really well in a cheesy 80's action flick, but in the real world such macho nonsense should be dismissed as utter inanity. Obama said "John McCain wants to chase Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but he won't even follow him to the cave where he lives!" This, of course, is in reference to McCain's puzzling refusal to go after bin Laden in Pakistan. In fact he's accused Obama of wanting to "invade Pakistan." Of course, Obama has never said anything even close to that. I think that line was a watershed moment in this election; as it cuts to the very core of John McCain's perceived national security bonfides.

Overall, I thought the speech was very inspiring. Those were two little highlights that struck me amongst numerous others. I mentioned those two because they marked Obama's response to McCain's two main lines of attack: 1) Barack Obama is an "elitist celebrity" obessesed with his own image; and 2) Barack Obama does not have the experience and national security bonafides that would enable him to be an effective comander-in-cheif. There were many other tidbits that stuck me. In order to go over those, I will outsource any additional commentary and analysis to Michael Tomasky and Ezra Klein.

McCain's Celebrity

Over at the TIME groupblog Swampland, Ana Marie Cox has a post noting John McCain's 13th appearance on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. That's the same amount of appearances as such celebrity heavy weights as Pamela Anderson and Simon Cowell. Just in case your wondering, Barack Obama that "elitist celebrity" has only appeared on the show once.

Via Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo.

Thoughts on Biden

I realize that this is coming 4 days late, but I really think that Joe Biden is a solid pick for Barack Obama's running mate. Biden is a very endearing Senator and I have no doubt that he will convince many voters that were on the fence in regards to Obama to fall fully into his camp. His personal story about commuting home every night to be with his sons after the tragic accident that killed his wife and daughter will resonate with American voters. Joe Biden truly is a blue-collar guy, an Irish Catholic from Scranton (yeah Dunder-Mifflin!!!) that grew up with absolutely nothing. Just like Barack Obama, the son of a single mother on welfare. Hopefully this pick will help combat the "elitist" and "celebrity" narrative. However, I think the Democrats could nominate a homeless 12 year old for President and the GOP would still call them an elitist. Mark Schmitt has a great mini-profile of Joe Biden over at the American Prospect. It's a short read that I highly recommend.

As for the convention last night, I thought the tribute to Teddy Kennedy was very moving. I thought considering the circumstance he looked good. His speech conveyed the fire and passion he still possesses, especially for lifting up ordinary Americans. Also, his vow to be on the Senate floor in January 2009 was very touching, and reassuring for that matter. His voice is a crucial one, and if Obama hopes to enact progressive change through the Senate, Kennedy's skills will be vital. I thought that Michelle Obama was electrifying. I had high expectations for this speech, but she absolutely knocked it out of the park. Her speech exhibited how normal she is. Personally, I find it abhorrent that millions of Americans still need to be convinced of that. It shows just how far our country has to go. However, her presence on that stage also demonstrated how far our country has progressed.

Photo used courtesy of Flickr user IowaPolitics.com July, 17 2007

Kicking it McCain Style

Via my coworker Taylor, via Daily Kos.

Bush Flip-Flops on Timetables

It's official. Condoleezza Rice has negotiated a draft agreement towards a timetable for withdrawl of US forces from Iraq. The draft calls for the removal of combat forces from cities by the end of June 2009, with all combat forces out by December 2011. Unfortunately, this agreement does leave a little room for so-called "residual" forces. Nevertheless, this is very encouraging news, as it will be good to have the majority of our troops home where they belong. This is, of course, a huge flip-flop for Bush. The administration has long made it clear that they view timetables for withdrawl as tantamount to surrender. Considering McCain thinks we need to stay in Iraq anywhere between 100 and 10,000 years I can only guess that he must've spontaneously combusted when he heard of this news.

It should be noted that the Bush administration has made a wise move here, so I will give credit where credit is due. However, it should be clear that this is a draft agreement so nothing is set in stone. In other words, in the unfortunate event of a McCain victory in November, he could throw this agreement out the window. Moreover, the Times article makes clear that the Americans and Iraqis have somewhat different interpretations of this agreement. In the end though, this is good news and it hopefully means that there is a light at the end of the tunnel for the troops over in Iraq.

This ADORABLE photo was used courtesy of Flickr user soldiersmediacenter April 23, 2007

Game On

Via Ezra Klein.

Why Republican Attacks Work

Michael Tomasky, the editor of Guardian America and former editor of the American Prospect, has a great post up on his new blog that explains why Republican attacks are so much more devastating than Democratic ones. The long and short of it is that Republicans attack character, while Democrats attack policy. The American people, are of course much more in tune with character issues than they are knowledgeable of policy. This is something the Democratic Party really needs to correct, and Tomasky has a few ideas on where to start.

The Shifting Evangelicals

E.J. Dionne has a great column in todays Post. Much has been made amongst the talking heads over the appearance of John McCain and Barack Obamma at Rick Warren's, the author of The Purpose Driven Life and an up-and-coming leader in the evangelical movement, forum last weekend. The main narrative that has been constructed by the MSM is that John McCain knocked it out of the park. This is, of course, about as surprising as 90 degree weather in August. However, Dionne strikes a number of chords that bring into focus the gravity of Obama's appearance at this forum. It demonstrates that Obama is comfortable talking about his faith, and he feels that he can use his faith to reach out to voters that normally wouldn't be inclined to vote for him. While I must admit, I was watching the Olympics and English Premier League football (Go Liverpool!) during the forum, many of the clips I saw of Obama were of him giving thoughtful answers and receiving polite applause in response. Moreover, Warren seemed to genuinely be interested in what Obama had to say; and while he didn't always agree with the Senator, he seemed to appreciate Obama's answers and he conveyed a great deal of respect for him.

McCain of course received a rousing reception (holy alliteration!), because let's be honest, most of these people are going to vote for him anyway, and he has all the right answers to the pressing social issues. However much Warren agreed with McCain's shoot-from-the-hip talking point responses, he seemed to be much more intriguied and impressed by Barack Obama. In that sense, I think you have to chalk this off as a victory for Obama. He had the guts and wherewithall to speak eloquently and thoughtfully in front of a potentailly very hostile audience, and he managed to at least gain the respect of Rick Warren and his parishoners.

It should also be noted, as alluded to by Dionne in his column, that Rick Warren seems like an inherently reasonable dude. While I find a number of his religous beliefs abhorrent, he seems to have a genuine respect for different opinions, and he's clearly an extremely intelligent individual (holy assonance!) Warren will actually invest himself in civilized discussions over issues, and conduct himself in respectable manner that serves to elevate the tone of political discourse. Barack Obama was more than happy to play along, John McCain wasn't, because frankly, he's not nearly smart enough to do so. The other note of praise I have for Warren, which Dionne again is wise to point out, is that he has brought a renewed focus on issues of poverty, hunger, and climate change that have been noticeably absent from the culture war platform of the evangelical movement for some time. I think Rick Warren would be a much better moderator of presidential debates than any of the dunces the MSM will throw at us!

Show Me the Money!

Via the Huffington Post, I found this nice little dity about Michael Phelps. It turns out that some business gurus think that Phelps could cash in on up to $40 million dollars in endorsement deals! That's $5 million per gold medal! Now, I'm not bringing this up to in any way impunge the character of Micheal Phelps. Phelps is without a doubt the most gifted athlete in Olympic history and he seems like an all around good guy. He endeared himself to me in 2004 when he gave up his spot in the medley relay so Ian Crocker, one of his biggest rivals, could have a chance at gold. That was a selfless move of pure class, and he deserves to be commended often for it. Moreover, Phelps' success will turn a lot of young people on to the great sport of swimming. It's just disappointing that Phelps' performance in Beijing will likely result in the rampant commecialization of a sport that has remained fairly pure throughout the years. However, this commercialization is indicative of the system, and Phelps should not be blamed for bringing it about.

Photo used courtesy of Flickr user nataliehehring.com August 12, 2008

Josh Marshall and Matt Yglesias: Making Sense

Over at Taling Points Memo (here) and Think Progress (here) Josh Marshall and Matt Yglesias are talking a lot of sense on Russia. John McCain wants the US to fast track Georgia into full membership with NATO. Now, for those of you unfamiliar with how NATO works, members of NATO are to view an attack on any member state to be an attack on their own country. Essentially, John McCain wants to go to war with Russia. Now, Yglesias is correct to point out that Russia is certainly not what it used to be. However, any idoit knows that a NATO strike on Russia (basically the US, Britain, and France attacking Russian forces in Georgia) would likely bring about World War III. Unfortunately, St. McCain doesn't think WWIII would be a bad thing. As I've stated before, John McCain believes that war is an honorable enterprise. War, in the eyes of John McCain, is an end in itself. A massive war with Russia would mean more Americans serving in the military (which John McCain sees as the highest possible calling) and fighting for meaningless Georgian villages all in the name of honor. McCain talks about honor like he's some kind of Klingon or Jedi Knight. Certainly, being honorable is noble endeavor. However, there are many ways for one to achieve honor without killing Russians. You could become a fire fighter. You could teach inner city kids how to read. You could joing the Peace Corps.

Anyways, I'm digressing. Many of the same voices that shouted us into Iraq are now attempting to shout us into war with Russia. This is, of course, pure lunacy. However, the American MSM views those that advocate war as the only "serious" foreign policy and national security experts. Consequently, rational voices are either drowned out or ignored completely.

In the meantime, people are dying. Georgia has continously shelled South Ossetia killing thousands of innocent Russian separtists, and Russia has bombed a number of Georgian cities, likely killing large numbers of Georgian civilians. McCain should be advocating diplomacy in order to bring this conflict to a swift but peaceful resolution. Instead, St. McCain, the maverick, is advocating MORE war. Your all smart people, think about that for a few minutes.

NOTE: Matt Yglesias has moved from the Atlantic over to Think Progress. Here's the link to his insightful blog.

Russia v. Georgia, What YOU Need to Know

You probably know by now that Russia has launched an incursion into South Ossetia. South Ossetia is a region in North Central Georgia that borders Russia. South Ossetia is populated by ethnic Russians that have no desire to be part of Georgia. It's EXTREMELY vital that you read some background on this here and here, because the American media is making this seem like it's all Russia's fault. Wrong. While Russia is no innocent pawn in this plight, Georgia is the aggressor and they initiated the fighting. Of course, these facts are too much for John McCain, whom is already attempting to pick a fight with Russia. In no way am I saying that Russia is completely innocent here, if you read the above posts I linked to, you'll find that they've done some inappropriate (to put it mildly) things in South Ossetia as well. However, it's important to note, since it will be absent in American MSM coverage, that the Georgian military has attacked civilian separtist positions in South Ossetia, and Russia's incursion is in response to those attacks. For good, objective coverage of this developing situation, I recommend you consult sources outside of the United States.
BBC News
The Gaurdian

The Tragedy of Brett Favre

While I try to avoid Wisconsin centric posts, I just could not stay silent on this issue any longer. The Brett Favre saga has come to a close. At least as far as the Green Bay Packers are concerned. Brett Favre is now a New York Jet. As a die-hard Packer fan, I must admit that I would've probably cried if Favre became a Minnesota Viking. I was also worried about him going to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, because the Packers and Bucs play each other in Tampa Bay during Week 4. This is the best case scenario for the Packers, yet I don't feel anything other than remorse, and I suspect many other Packer fans feel the same way. Brett Favre was the face of the Green Bay Packers for 16 years. I was 7 years old when he became the starting quarterback for the Packers, I remember how the entire state of Wisconsin would be elated with his success, and devastated with his failures. For the 16 years Brett Favre was with the Green Bay Packers, he WAS the Packers, he WAS Green Bay, he WAS Wisconsin. When Favre decided to retire last February it was a very emotional time for all football fans. His tearful press conference was one of the most bracingly poignant scenes I have ever witnessed.

This makes Favre's blitzkreig back into the NFL extremely painful for all parties involved. The Packers while they certainly missed their beloved QB, had moved on. Aaron Rodgers had waited in the wings for 3 years, and it was his turn to take the helm. People don't realize how much preparation goes into a football season. After the Packers heartbreaking loss to the Giants in the NFC Championship game, planning began the next morning. Less than a month later, when Favre announced his retirement, the Packers allowed for a brief period to honor their departing leader, but then it was time to prepare Aaron Rodgers for the staring job. That's what makes the recent columns of Gene Wojciechowski (especially this one) and the recent antics of Keith Olbermann on Countdown so frustrating. They act as if there are no two sides to this issue. If Brett Favre wants in, he gets in. Look, as a Packer fan for all 24 years of my life (neither Wojciechowski nor Olbermann can say that) even I can acknowledge that it's in the best interest of the franchise that Favre move on. He's 38 years old. Certainly he's still a young man, but 38 is practicaly geriatric in the NFL. At some point he was going to have to retire. There's no doubt that he's still a gifted QB, and he will rank among the top 5 at the beginning of the season. However, he RETIRED IN FEBRUARY. The Packers couldn't just sit around with their thumbs up their assess crying about it. They had to move on, and they did. For Favre to come back in the fashion he did was tremendously selfish and detrimental to the Packers team he holds so dear. Wojciechowski and Olbermann know this very well, but for whatever reason, they refuse to acknowledge it. They keep mentioning about how well Favre did last year, and no one is denying that. Favre had one of his best seasons ever, and I enjoyed watching him beat the living shit out of the Vikings and pretty much every other team that dared get in the Packers way (the Bears, Cowboys, and Giants serving as notable exceptions); however, he decided that he was mentally tired and he had enough. He could've stayed, and I'm sure Ted Thompson (the GM) and Mike McCarthy (the coach) would've welcomed him back with open arms. But he didn't, he retired. The reporting of Wojciechowski and Olbermann (whom, despite this area of disagreement, I still hold in extremely high regard) failed to consider that, and I don't really understand why.
Unfortunately, this all plays out like a Greek Tragedy. Favre has been traded to a team where the head coach, offensive coordinator, and the quarterbacks coach are younger than he is. John Clayton details how this is truly a lousy situation for Favre, here and here. I can't stress how sad of an end this is to this completely avoidable mess. I really hope Favre does well with the Jets. I will cheer for him almost as hard as I did when he was with the Packers. But know their is a great deal of damage, some of which may be irreparable, between the Packers and Brett Favre. Once again, this man was the leader of the most storied team in all of football (truly the New York Yankees of the NFL) for 16 years! Brett Favre was the most beloved figure in the state of Wisconsin. Now he's a New York Jet and he's alienated legions of fans that use to take his every word as gospel. Oh Brett, where or where did you go wrong?