Why America Will Win
Hollywood. See, here, as in Britain, we've got a long-established and generally revered (when it isn't being reviled or undermined) national broadcaster, producing some very high-quality programming (when they aren't, as in the U.S., just recycling BBC content), and one of the highlights is Andrew Denton's Enough Rope, a talk-show with a very limited number of interviews during its hour-long time slot, which, tonight, upon returning from the summer hiatus, is going to air with the Crown Princess (and Prince) of Denmark, a very nice Tasmanian girl, I'm sure, but so what? Yes, she can out-sail her new husband, which I'd expect, and her itinerary while here shows a deal more public service-class than the Prince of Wales is managing during pretty much the same time period, but her appearance on Denton is just pandering to the worst kind of celebrity obsession. It's almost A Member of the Wedding. And the result is that while half the country spends an hour on the ABC, the rest of us - my household included - will be watching the Academy Awards, and the ones who watched Enough Rope will be switching back to the Oscars as soon as HRH Mary and Frederick are through. Nothing beats Hollywood. Not in the movies themselves, and not in real life. (And by the time I get home, they'll already be long over.)

A Good Defense
Canada won’t participate in the Reagan-Bush-Bush missle defense scheme, wisely choosing not to spend untold billions on a system that does not work, despite fudged data, skewed results, and canned “tests.” Ambassador Paul Cellucci’s “confusion” over Canada’s decision is pretty confused itself, but stresses that the U.S. will still shoot down any missiles it detects coming in from the north. Luckily, the new SDI project doesn’t include working technology to shoot down anything, just like when Reagan proposed the idea just to scare the Soviets. At least Bush the elder was smart enough not to believe the hype.

Unfair: Sting & the Tsunami
Shouldn't this be the other way around? (Yeah, o.k., cheap shot. Sue me.)

Defrocking the Mad Monk
Tony Abbott, the Liberal government’s health minister, is a long-standing vocal opponent of abortion, not just from his private Catholic morality, but as a public figure addressing government policy. The latest twist, that he fathered an out-of-wedlock child who was given up for adoption and whom he has only now met, is remarkable only for the fact that Mr. Abbott is on the front bench of Parliament with the portfolio he has. Children given up for adoption and their natural parents are reunited, with more or less success, all the time. What makes the story last in the press is the cynical exploitation Mr. Abbott employs it for. Anne Summer’s analysis raises some valid points to balance the story as it’s being touted from the Abbott side. The decision to give the child up for adoption wasn’t “mutual”; Abbott ran out on his pregnant girlfriend and left her to make the choice alone. They split up seven months into the pregnancy, and Abbott played no part in supporting his former partner through the birth and adoption or thereafter. This is not unusual, of course; many 19-year-olds make the same choices, although some will come through it better and some worse. Some will give the child up, and some will terminate the pregnancy. Abortion, as we all know by now, is deeply traumatic, and many women remain haunted for years afterward. Giving a child up can be similarly traumatic and as haunting. Adoption is certainly a better option than being raised unwanted or by parents unable to provide for or commit emotionally to the child, but it isn’t as easy as that. Not getting pregnant in the first place is the best option of all, but not particularly realistic, especially when we’re talking about teenagers and young adults, who (face it) aren’t always particularly bright about these things, regardless of whether they manage to get a seat in Parliament later or not. But let’s be equally clear that abortion shouldn’t be a method of birth control per se, in which case the decision of Mr. Abbott’s then-girlfriend is admirable.

So it’s now a matter worth speculation: why now? Why has Mr. Abbott gone public? That his grown child would be curious regarding the identity of his natural father, would seek him out, would have a positive reconciliation with him, is all very positive. The public has no interest, except for as much as Mr. Abbott can generate with the complicity of the press and all us on the internet. Who tipped off the Bulletin? And why did Abbott, after agreeing to an exclusive with the Bulletin, then go to the Telegraph? And why then did Mr. Abbott start the discussion on abortion in the media frenzy between the Telegraph’s article and the Bulletin’s? The immediate answer’s obvious. (Not a political football? Then don’t put him up on the tee.) What deeper motivations may be at work, however, remain to be seen.

Look, Ma, No Cavities
We all know brushing regularly helps us keep our choppers in place, and it’ll soon be more effective, if the toothpaste that fixes cavities gets on the market. (So much for fluoride in the water? Just as well; we all know it causes communism.)

Crop Circling
It’ll be less than interesting in the end, I figure, when we find out what the 60 x 30 metre lawn-etching means: a man, a dollar, a wave, a tombstone = ? If not for the dollar, the tsunami guess would make sense; if not for the tombstone, I’d accept the surfing logo idea. Unless . . . maybe somebody’s dream of a surf shop in Aceh was wiped out in the tsunami?

Into the Valley of Death
After committing the nation to war, the addition of 450 new troops isn’t really a surprise. Unlike other members of the so-called “coalition of the willing,” Australia has been in from the start of “major combat operations.” Whereas the Dutch and various others having already exited or now pulling out, John Howard’s involvement has to continue, or he would be guilty of yet another deception. The election at the end of January doesn’t change the need for combat troops or reconstruction teams; the on-going and increasingly organized insurgency requires additional opposition if Bush’s experiment is to succeed. But Howard’s turn-around had to come with a price tag on it, and I wonder what he’s bought this time?

Realty Reality
A land tax on investment property is sensible, but surely it shouldn’t be so hard to structure it fairly. Sydney, Australia in fact, has been on a real estate investment binge of such enormity that prices here are hard to credit, and no quarter-percent interest rate rise is going to do much to dampen the presently flattened enthusiasm sufficiently to bring the housing market back to reality, which means other efforts are needed. That “small investment unit” is still getting negative-gearing, often enough, and generating an income, so I have little enough sympathy over a bit of tax to pay for the infrastructure supporting it. Your little “family beach shack,” well, I can see an argument for structuring the taxation so as to encourage limits to development. Do you have any idea what’s required to sustain even a modest presence on the shoreline? (Of course, if you’re one of those who don’t care about the environment or whether your neighbors are in any way inconvenienced, then go ahead, cry poor.) No, I’m with Bob Carr on this. Investment properties deserve to attract taxes. If you can afford a second home, you can afford to pay your way.

International Feel
The Booker’s gone global. The special prize’s short list has the usual suspects and Nobellists, but also gives the nod to Philip Roth and John Updike. Personally, I think Updike should be out; he gets published enough in the New Yorker, a prize greater than all others. And should perhaps previous Booker wins preclude inclusion?

Throwing the Baby Out with the Sabbathwater
It worries me when I hear Garry Brack, of Employers First talk about what’s fair. At least he’s honest about what he wants (unlike when he called his organization the “New South Wales Employers Federation”), which is to give more power to employers over the rights established by the labor movement to working men and women. He’s the type to claim that “hard work never killed anybody, unless it scares them to death,” but he seems afraid of paying a living wage than of anything else. So it isn’t that he wants to eliminate weekends, an overstated charge, so much as he wants to stop paying for them. Business changes we all know about already, where jobs are outsourced to Third World countries, where “employees” are “independent contractors,” and where governments have bent over backwards so far to keep employers employing as to effectively end up paying them for the privilege, aren’t enough. Brack’s snide complaints and litany of scare-mongering stories of injustices perpetrated by employees are an insult to anyone who’s ever worked for a living. Isn’t it enough that white-collar workers are already giving up hours upon hours without pay? Australia has already effectively moved beyond the 40-hour week into 50-, 60-, and 70-hours, especially among its white-collar population, while employers for the last ten years and more have cried poor. Competition is tough, but companies can’t keep laying it off on workers’ backs while paying their CEO’s hundreds of times above the rate of their other employees. It’s just greed, as usual.

AARP Art
The American Association of Retired Persons has been one of the most effective lobbying groups of all time, fighting for the rights of citizens over the age of 55, educating retirees and helping them maintain a reasonable standard of living. But that just makes them an obstacle to overcome for the Republicans intent on gutting Social Security, who have now recruited the same creeps who brought us the Swift Boat lies. Their first ad: a pretty little graphic depicting AARP as being “against” the troops and “for” gay marriage. No explanation, just a picture of a combat soldier with a red “x” and two men in evening wear kissing with a green tick. Deliberate and calculating, not to mention inane. Are you a member of AARP? Your organization can take these creeps to the cleaners. Go get ‘em.

Moving People
Now why is Bob Carr putting the kibosh on light rail in Sydney? He says the “narrow” streets of Sydney aren’t appropriate to tram lines, but there’s some love affair with cars going on here, maybe because parking meters and fines revenues work better for him than efficiently transporting people from one end of the city to another. Or maybe he’s disgruntled because Lord Mayor Moore’s plan looks to provide greater flexibility at a lower cost than Carr’s Epping-to-Chatswood rail link. There is still also the unresolved issue of Clover Moore herself, her election to the mayoralty a slap in the face for Carr’s Machiavellian ambitions during the City of Sydney/South Sydney Councils merger, which appears to have led Bob to act out his frustration in childishly opposing whatever Clover proposes. Regardless of the source, a knee-jerk reaction against providing light rail in Sydney is just power-tripping. As the city grows in population, better methods of moving through town are needed, and that isn’t just ring-roads and traffic tunnels. Mr. Carr appears to have in mind the needs of automobiles over people, and that’s not what cities are about. The suburban nature of most of greater Sydney is becoming less characteristic rather than more, with even the NSW government limiting land grants despite population growth. Sydney is developing its urban nature beyond the CBD, and Bob Carr needs to recognize this, even as Clover Moore already has.

Centennial Weekend
Democrats Abroad Australia spent Saturday in Centennial Park, not attending the annual "Good Vibrations" concert, coincidentally, but just having a bit of a chat about upcoming events, such as participation in the GLBT Mardi Gras parade, the expected visit to Australia by new DNC chair Howard Dean, and otherwise socializing over various picnic foodstuffs and outdoors activities, including volleyball, participation in which was a serious error on my part, involving as it did: flailing around, falling over, and spending the next day aching from unusual sportif muscle usage. The gathering was convened with the excuse of the Presidents' Day observance back home, which we can still celebrate regardless of the fate of our candidate, since it's still officially "Washington's Birthday," and used to celebrate both Washington and Lincoln, both of whom deserve the honor. Although I'd failed in my efforts to establish a rain date reservation for us, the threat of thunderstorms didn't materialize until late in the afternoon, so as much as I hope nobody got too wet (and the only lightning strike on a person was out at Bondi), well, most of the day worked out quite well.

Love Is in the Air
The Fifth Avenue hawks are home again and making a bit of a display of themselves apparently, but who knew they had a 'blog?

Nothing, If Not Consistent
Although little more than a one-trick pony (although death squads are a hell of a trick), John Negroponte is now slated to become the new director of national intelligence. This will surely allow the Bush administration to enshrine extraordinary rendition, torture, and other human rights abuses as the de facto rule of law, at least until one run-in too many with Rumsfeld sees Negroponte’s head handed to him.

False Idols
So Ian Pilmer finally gets around to watching The Day After Tomorrow, and he’s so upset by having paid $14.50 for a bad movie that he writes an bit of editorial drivel about how environmentalists are the new dogmatists, even going so far as to say they are “evil.” Let’s be clear about a couple of things. First, as Helen points out, Professor Pilmer, in addition to his work at Melbourne University, is aligned with the big mining outfits, so he’s got a bit of an axe to grind. Second, data are essential and plentiful to assessing environmental conditions and determining a course of action to reduce undue effects of human over-consumption of natural resources, which are well-established facts, as everyone but the Republican U.S. Congress, George W. Bush, and John Howard’s Australian parliamentary majority are prepared to accept. But by demonizing environmentalists (whom he dismisses as “city folk,” as if urban living somehow disqualified intelligent people from having an opinion on anything outside the door to their flats) claiming that their “concerns [result] in evil,” using derisive words and terms intended to vilify (“irrationality,” “asinine” – the word used specifically in reference to the movie he’s too embarrassed to have watched to name – etc.), and then claiming that overuse of water and an increasing reliance on gas-guzzling private vehicles legitimizes dismissing environmental concerns as “trivialities,” Pilmer not only fails to make a respectable argument (let alone pause to wipe the froth from his mouth), he only shows how intent he is on supporting the continued and selfish misuse of natural resources for personal gain. Sorry, Professor, but those of us who would prefer you didn’t despoil every bit of nature you can reach aren’t as uncritically-minded as you’d like to have everyone believe. Most people can tell that a multiple-year-long drought and an increasing population are putting strains on an already delicate ecosystem and that generations of industrial revolution developments are causing a variety of problems elsewhere. This is the kind of thinking that has the U.S. denying acid rain, even while its manufacturing plants pump enough sulphuric acid into the air so that the seasonal precipitation is killing fish across the Canadian southeast, not to mention what’s happening in Eastern Europe. Yes, there are short-term effects taking place, but the longer they are allowed to run on, the more they contribute to long-term problems. Famine in Africa has a human component other than environmental damage, but before long, that’s what it becomes. It’s a long-standing engineering principle that you cannot suppress a problem without it just popping up elsewhere. Problems need solutions, not ignorance.

Above the Law
Is this for real? I mean, I wouldn't put it past the Bushies to have this on, but, no, it can't be real. Oops, no it's real, and it's passed. The Department of Homeland Security now has the ability to suspend the rule of law without judicial review. (Can I rely on the Senate to turn this back?)

Goin' to California (in My Mind)
I'd like to be going for real, because I never did eat at the restaurant where my brother is the executive chef, the first fully-certified organic restaurant in California. Organics are making a bit of noise here, too, with increased availability even in the major chain grocery stores, but California's rules are tough, from what I've heard, not to mention that even with larger numbers of growers producing organically, it's all too easy to fall out of compliance, suddenly reducing supply. (Monsanto, invested heavily in genetic modification, is apparently a serious source of contagion and dispute.) Anyway, I like the look of the Thai curry and the organic fries, and I've got nothing against organic beer just on general principles. Anyone heading up Mendocino way likely ought to stop in.

For $225, Dick Cheney Will Visit Your House
Or the next best thing: your very own brain in a jar. Dear Santa Claus. . . . [via Boing-Boing]

Movie Notes from All Over
Up by my father-in-law’s place, Fox Searchlight was all set to begin filming Eucalyptus, adapted from a very popular and award winning novel (that I didn’t think was all that, but if Clint Eastwood can film Bridges of Madison County . . .), until “creative differences,” apparently over the quality of the script, scuttled the production. So, no Eucalyptus and all those people up Bellingen way out the money on their guest house arrangements and all those people from the crew on their way back to Sydney. For their sakes, I hope production is resumed sooner rather than later, although as for the film, I don’t really give a fig.