Economist Versus Idiot: Bastard In A Basket

The World Last Week

-Bill Richardson won't be America's next commerce secretary--he's under investigation for possibly giving one of his donors a state contract.

-That wasn't the only stumble for Barack Obama's relatively smooth selection process, as Joe Biden called the secretive nature of the nomination of Leon Panetta (to be the head of the CIA) "a mistake."  Hey Joe, you do know you're kind of supposed to back the dude up, right?  Also, is that a gun in your hand?

-Okay, that last joke was really bad.

-Raul Castro said he's only willing to talk to Barack Obama as an equal.  Barack Obama will deliver a public response after they replace his spleen, which came out of his ass from laughing so hard.

-A bunch of gunmen threw bombs at a television station in Mexico because they didn't like they were reporting the drug war in Mexico.  That's an appropriate response.

-China wants to remove vulgar and pornographic content from the internet.  China doesn't really understand what the internet is for.

-There was a fire in a Bangkok nightclub that killed 64 people on New Year's Eve.  The owner is being charged with negligence.

-Turkish officials arrested 30 more people under suspicions they were involved in the recent coup plot.

-Time Warner looks to experience an annual loss, mostly because advertising dollars have suffered at both the AOL and publishing divisions.  Time Warner is responsible for a bunch of shitty comic books, as well as some shitty websites, and sometimes they kill children.  Oh wait, they used to publish Automatic Kafka, that was a good one.

Leaders

-I knew this depressing fact, but I seem to forget it between articles:  wars in Gaza took place in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, 2006 and, of course, right now.  Although we seem to, maybe just, kind of hope, to be approaching an actual cease fire, the Economist goes ahead and fires off a cover, a opening leader and two "briefing" articles.   It's a lot to take in, and in all honesty:  how far do you want to go with this?  A UN school was bombed last week.  There's no real reason beyond cynicism to believe that Israel isn't being honest when they say that Hamas fighters were hiding in the school--but that doesn't change all the dead children.  The article here about the ideas behind Israel's war philosophy is an intelligent one, and it makes sense...but it's still a difficult collection of information whose real world impact is just too much to bear.  There's just nothing to add to this situation, from a "let's summarize some articles sense."  What do you say?  That you support Hamas, who do all kinds of awful shit, or you support Israel, who don't seem to want to do all kinds of awful shit, but do anyway, or do you want to just quote some soft drink commercial and sing some John Lennon?  Stick your head in the sand and ignore it?  I can't help but look at those numbers, those years of conflict and gore and just think "I don't believe anything is worth this."  There has to be a better way.  If there isn't--well.  What then?

-There's a big advertisement for Rolls Royce this week, but instead of just being a blatant one, it comes in the form of an op-ed piece and a briefing about the success of the company.  While there's a lot of good lessons to be learned from the way that Royce changed it's fortunes and became a global success, it's not hard to come away from these two pieces with a bit of the ugly taste that comes from reading a professionally made piece of public relations.

-A short op-ed that makes a massive proposal, this is one of those tiny little Economist pieces that will probably be most ill-received amongst those who read it:  want to reform the financial problems in America, says the paper?  Than change everything all at once, Naomi Klein style.  Reform the tax system, Social Security and Medicare in one proposal that can't be amended by Congress.  Pay for subsidized health insurance by removing the tax break for employer provided insurance, reduce the payroll tax for low income workers and push up the retirement age, etc.  Hurt everyone, but do it at the same time--unlike the previous administration, which did things like subsidizing prescription drugs without reforming Medicare, or cut taxes without reforming the code.  In simplest terms, what this calls for is simply "balance".  (It's also a response to Obama's debate tendency to talk about expanding benefits for the unemployed, tax credits for the low-paid, and investing in alternative energy without explaining where the money for such drastic changes would come from.)

-Some excellent analysis on the nature of the Russian/European gas problems, including two pesky things:  one, that Europe continues not to pursue a diversified energy policy that would cut their dependence on Putin's decisions and two, that when the Ukraine and Russia have disagreements--on anything, from political leanings to pipeline construction--that the result hurts the entire client base for Russia's gas.  While nobody is happy about those moments when old French ladies can't heat their homes, it's clear that nobody is going to fix the system in place unless they've got some freaked out civilians at home.  (Oh, there's the environment stuff too.)

Letters

-Three letters about Tintin here, all of which do no service to those who fight the useless, ball-shriveling battle to "make comics cool" by saying, no shit, "I was suckled on Tintin along with my mother's milk."  Somebody else talks about how Tintin "would never have started the invasion of Iraq."  Really?  Yeah, you know who else wouldn't have started the invasion in Iraq?  Patrick Bateman, Captain Trips, the ghost of Adolf Hitler, a pair of socks made out of whole wheat flour and a broken window shade that channels the future children of Emmanuel Lewis.  What's your fucking point?  Wait, I said that wrong.

What's your fucking point, NERD?

United States

-The Economist joins the rank and file who have used references to Waiting For Godot in relation to the financial crisis, bringing the grand total of reasons why it's a good thing Samuel Beckett isn't alive to express his contempt for all of us to roughly 871, the middle 13 being that version of the play that Robin Williams did during his run on Mork and Mindy.  (No, not even for the freakshow value, if you're asking.)  One more time, if you haven't heard, the deficit is estimated to fly from last September's 2008 total of $455 billion to $1.2 trillion by the same time next year.  As always, the deficit is a magic sort of number that matters most to those trying to manage the countries budget--already the same office providing those estimates admits that the deficit will most likely drop back to 1.1% of the American GDP by 2019.  ($1.2 trillion would represent 8.3%, the worst since World War II.)  As always with news articles until after next week, the rest basically says:  We have to hope Obama knows how to fix this, because we can only guess at his plans, and you may want to decide which kid you love the most before the lights shut off.  Bad moon rising!

-The Economist, unlike the New York Times, supports Obama's decision to offer the job of surgeon general to CNN's chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta.  Their support seems to be a bit lackluster though:  yes, he's a qualified neurosurgeon and a prominent Indian-American, but the argument that he's good at being on television as well as being a more qualified public speaker than Joycelyn Elders is kind of an empty statement.  I doubt we want "good at being on television" to be a selling point for high-level government positions.  Unless we're planning on offering a job to Timothy Olyphant, because seriously:  motherfucker is dreamy as hell.

-The Economist lists some of the Democrat's current problems that hit on the first day of the 111th Congress--the whole Roland Burris-can't-come-in debacle, the scandal surrounding Bill Richardson, the negative reaction to the elevation of Leon Panetta to the position of CIA director, as well as the "that CNN guy" reaction to the aforementioned Sanjay Gupta--things aren't as smooth as people were hoping.  (Who are these people who expected a smooth Congressional opening?  These optimists?  Did they just get their first newspaper last week?  Why are we still checking in with lazy idiots?  I mean, I'm a lazy idiot, and if you're reading this sentence, you must know the answer.  Why do this?  It's like asking somebody who just learned to read what they think about the English language as an information delivery system.  Sure, they're a child, so the answer does have some potentiality for cuteness, but c'mon, it's not like you can learn anything from it that adds to the study of linguistics.)

-California's budget, which was mentioned last year to be in trouble (which is pretty much where California's budget lives, "in trouble") is at a deadlock in the state legislature.  California isn't allowed to run a budget deficit the way that the federal government can, and the current discrepancy between the amount of projected revenues and projected spending is a fearsome $41.6 billion.  As always, the reasons why this is global news, and not just national, is that California is the world's eighth-biggest economy.  That's always a mind-blower to me.

-They're still doing these "Obama's stolen Blackberry" articles.  For the love of God please stop.

-Ha, K-Mart's layaway business is taken off again, Sears just brought their own version out of mothballs and there's some website called eLayaway that's taking off.  Really?  We're bringing back layaway?  How about phrenology and telephone books.  Those were kind of dumb too.

-Lexington's column compares Obama's agenda for the coming year, favorably, to an IKEA ad campaign.  I'd go into why, but for some reason just can't get around that.  The ad campaign is "change begins at home."  It is pretty awesome that the new Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, was 1) born in a shack, 2) nearly murdered by gangsters and 3) vocally called George W. Bush the worst president ever.  I'm not sure I totally agree, as Nixon was a son of a bitch and Thomas Jefferson fucked his slaves, but I guess I kind of assumed that you couldn't be that vocally unsupportive of a US president and still end up as the majority leader in the US Senate.  That's kind of cool.

The Americas

-Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has an 80% popularity rating in his second term as president of Brazil.  This article goes into why he won't be using it to accomplish any of the things that Brazil "needs", according to the Economist.  (Sorry, I don't know anything about Brazilian tax infrastructure--couldn't tell you if the stuff that the magazine is asking for is worth getting jazzed about or not.)  With an election in 2010, and a splintering incumbent party behind him, Lula's main goal--and sorry, but this article is pretty cynical--seems to be to maintain that popularity rating without doing anything major, while at the same time trying to appear to be doing something.  He sure sounds like a nice guy.  It doesn't sound like he has what it takes to give Brazil the sort of financial reform it needs right now.  Good luck?

-The timing on this isn't completely clear, but did you know that the way Quebec responded to the drop in fertility rating in the mid-1980's was to pay people money for babies?  (You get to keep your baby, you just get money for having one.)  $500 for the first baby, $1000 for the second, any beyond that could net you up to $8000.  (Canadian dollars.)  That's so fucking gross.  It didn't work, and Quebec still doesn't have a birth rate that replenishes their stock of human life, so the country is trying some other tactics.  This article is about those, but seriously:  I'm only going to remember the "bucks for babies" program.

Asia

-It's not hard to guess at why no major American media outlet pays anything more than cursory attention to the situation in Sri Lanka right now.  Gaza, the American presidential change-over, those pesky wars and the Russian gas crisis--as well as the global financial situation--but that doesn't make what's happening in Sri Lanka any less worthy of coverage.  In fact, considering the difficulty at getting quality information out of the country (as opposed to countless reports of how fucked up the sales are at the goddamn mall) that much more integral...that is, if you give a shit about a bloody conflict that has gone on for over twenty five years, leaving thousands dead.  It's been almost three months since the Sri Lankan government referenced how many of it's soldiers have been injured and killed, not just to the world, but to their own people.  Last week, the prime minister actually withheld the death count regarding their "bloodiest military operation ever" from the countries own parliament.  Fighting with the Tigers goes back 25 years, but the last few years have seen more money dumped into it than any other period combined.  Yes, it seems to be working:  the Tigers are almost sure to be annihilated by the end of the year.  The problem is that no one--except for a select few--has any conception of the cost.  On top of that that,  little of what motivated Tamil to build such a fearsome guerrilla army in the first place has any attention paid to it at all. 

-Here's an article that touches on those weird South Korean political brawls that went down at the National Assembly last week.  Disregarding the overall embarrassment of internet accessible fight videos, the fight is over 95 bills up for passage--the article touches on a few of them.  The biggest one, of course, is the ratification of a free-trade agreement with the United States.  Originally, the deal looked good to go, but since Barack Obama's campaign complaints about it, a healthy portion of the original South Korean backers have turned against it.  Either way, it's an ugly situation.

-Here's a short temperature taking article on the situation between Pakistan and India, no, I don't know why I'm writing a list either:

1) Mumbai is attacked in November, 170 people dead.  India starts clamoring that Pakistan was somehow involved.

2) India releases a dossier including the interrogation results of the one surviving attacker, various communications they intercepted and evidence leading towards the belief that the weapons involved are from Pakistan.  All the evidence in the dossier seems to point towards direct Pakistani involvment.

3) Nothing happens but word fights.

That last part is what the article is all about:  Pakistan has been pumping up their troop deployment, taking Afghan border troops and moving them away towards India, concerned about India's possible military retribution.  Indian commentators believe that they're doing this not so much because they're concerned about actual military retribution (something it doesn't yet appear that India is going to do anytime soon) but because it's a plausible reason to back away from the Afghan border, otherwise known as the immensely unpopular US/Afghan conflict--remember how the US dropped bombs on Pakistani soldier allies accidentally?  Pakistan does.  India is optimistically pushing the international diplomacy route, Pakistan is reminding everybody (except their own population, who hates this) of their support for America's war on terror--stalemate, for now.  When and if this happens:  it will happen overnight.  If there's another attack, either on the scale of or surpassing Mumbai?  Even faster.

Middle East and Africa

-Reasons to cheer:  Ghana showed Africa how you handle an election.  Despite having a final tally that found John Atta Mills only winning by .4%, the transition was smooth--no rioting, no UN mandates; in other words, none of what we've seen in Kenya, Nigeria and Zimbabwe.  While that does mean that he's only got half of the country backing him up...hell, America's been doing that for years.  Look how well it's worked for us!

Shit.

-There were only 3,000 Ethiopian troops left in Somalia--and by now, they are probably all gone.  It's difficult to come up with a country in the world that's in a worse situation than this one:  the only relatively stable areas under the bloody control of warlords, the seat of power is in a precarious situation with the United Nations following the resignation of Somalian president Abdullahi Yusuf, and there's only a dwindling window of fantasy wherein the world can believe that Nigeria, Malawi or Ghana will back up their pledge to send troops.   The only people doing well?  The native Islamist militias who started the Ethiopian war in 2006, now stronger than ever, more ruthless, more well armed, and hungrier for control.

-Iraq's struggles to control their country continue, but there's a minor bright spot.  The presidential palace has finally been cleared of the Americans, who are now sitting back in the Green Zone's American embassy, the largest of its kind.  The palace remains somewhat unused, as the president and the prime minister are both laying claim on it, but either way:  Iraq continues to get closer and closer to the day that most Iraqi civilians look too, the day when they regain sovereignty over their own nation.

-Hey, let's do something illegal, here we go:  "This blog thinks the King of Morocco does a bad job and wears a funny hat."  Geez, look at that.  Totally illegal thing I just did there.  You can get fined for that!  Well, under Moroccan law, at least.  Here's an article about that, including the awesomeness of McDonald's who call one of their hamburgers a "McSahara."

Europe

-Charlemagne apparently used part of his vacation getting completely full of himself, as he/she turns in a column that tries to use the European misuse of standard antibiotics as a way to discuss the probable rise in trade protectionism that will hit the continent soon enough.  The problem with it is that it seems pretty clear that Charlemagne really just wanted to talk about how stupid people shouldn't abuse antibiotics (as rampant use of antibiotics leads to weaker immune systems and stronger diseases), but not so much about protectionism.  It does point to a standard thing with these guys and gals though:  the Economist despises local protectionist laws, and believes they hold no good ramifications for the global financial situation.  Yet they only write articles on why they think this about once a year, and usually after the fact.  That doesn't mean they need to mention every week why they hate it so much, but it would be nice if they spent a little more time backing up their reasons.  Oh well.  This is only week two.

-As popular as it is for the American to point and snidely laugh when the French get it wrong, it's just as respectable a sport to pat backs when they get it right.  If this article is to be believed, the French government has a female politician who just recently gave birth, out of wedlock, to a baby girl and has chosen not to reveal to the public or press who the father is.  That, in itself: not impressive or unimpressive.  Not interesting at all, actually.  What is interesting is that the press, and the general French public, have chosen to respect her wishes to have a private life.  They haven't made it a scandal, in other words.  They just: Haven't Cared.  That's pretty spectacular.  Of course, that isn't the purpose of this article.  No, this article is about how Nicolas Sarkozy elected some ministers (she is one of them) from the various racial minority groups in France and has now ended up fighting with them on a consistent basis.  Taken from a birds eye view, that's pretty great as well--France is a country that consistently ignores non-whites, having only one black parliamentarian from the mainland, choosing only local (white) Frenchies to lead them--and it would have sucked if the three in virgin territory were a bunch of sycophantic droners.  This article is a close-up look--as far as I could see, it sounds like one of the three, Rachida Dati, should probably go, whereas it sounds like Rama Yade is just the sort of passionate young woman who should be the human-rights minister; anyone whose willing to insult Muammar Qaddafi is aces in my book.  There doesn't seem to be any problem at all with Fadela Amara, and I think she's just getting mentioned because she's, you know: from a minority group.

-Italy's Democratic Party got smacked with the scandal stick over the first week of January, an unusual turn of events considering what a unrepentant criminal Silvio Berlusconi is.  But no, it was the liberals who got themselves in trouble here, with four arrested for a plan to "systematically loot" public funds.  There was a fifth that would have been arrested as well, but that individual committed suicide when the investigation began.  Other major Democratic politicians will probably be arrested as the investigation drags on.  Nice one, Italy.  There's never a better time to steal millions from the government than right in the middle of a global financial crisis.

Britain

-The Economist doesn't put much stock in the upcoming Gordon Brown sponsored "jobs summit", built around his desire to create 100,000 jobs in the health, education and infrastructure fields through the cunning use of investment.  As is glumly pointed too, again:  jobs are going to disappear for many, and counting on the government--the same government that has yet to come up with a serviceable solution to the still-on-the-horizon energy crisis--to pretty much subsidize employment is an untenable solution that can not last.  At the same time--this isn't in the article--what does the Economist expect the guy to do?  Tell people to start fishing or something?

-Determining your taste in economics--Keynesian or the Friedman cabal--will pretty much figure out how you feel about Sir Alan Walters, the British spiritual son of Friedman's Chicago ideas.  This article details how he brought that style of economics, a style I find far too repugnant and magical to be objective about, to Britain during the reign of Thatcher.  For the most part though, it's just an obituary for him--he died on January 3rd.

-Bagehot is finally able to get some more punches in at Gordon Brown now that the opinion polls seem to be heading back to where they were (negative) before Brown pushed through his initial bail-out and Britain decided they liked him again.  He's more than happy to do it, and if you've read enough Bagehot, you know that it's sort of fun to see him pick on the Labour party even when you don't necessarily agree with him.  (I have decided he's a dude.  I have my reasons.)

International

-Sorry Britain:  but it's best that nobody publishes anything worthwhile in the journalistic fields until you figure out your fucking free speech laws.  As it stands now, incredibly rich assholes like Khalid bin Mahfouz and Rinat Akhmetov can go after reporters, newspapers--bloggers--for libel in a weird circumstance that allows them to sue worldwide in British court.  Oh, and not just sue.  Sue and actually win.  For anybody who cares about this kind of stuff--meaning, you know, gives a shit about whether or not the truth can come out, whether justice can be bought, and not just "oh squee, I'm a dipshit who wants to tell the world what they should and shouldn't read"--this article deals with a cause worth caring about.

-Good things happening for the International Atomic Energy Agency, the group the world looks to when it comes time to deal with Iran and North Korea and their nuclear ambitions, yet suffers from a lack of funding or support from the nations (until recently, the US was one).  Barack Obama, in another of his campaign promises that is built on some money we don't have yet, wants to double the IAEA's budget by 2020, and besides that, there's growing supports for making the safeguards (basically, the rules regarding having nuclear weapons) stronger, which would make things easier for the inspectors.  There are plenty of thankless--yet incredibly important--jobs in the world right now.  It's nice to see anybody paying attention to these guys at all.

Business

-Everybody knows the story of how Steve Jobs came back to Apple and changed the companies fortunes entirely, but does everybody know the story of how Michael Dell came back to Dell and failed to do the same?  Or how Howard Schultz came back to Starbuck's last year only to watch the share price get sliced in half?  Good stories, the both of them, and they both deal well with the tendency of superstar CEO's to pick successors who either aren't allowed to roam free or are pretty much puffed up sycophants.  Also...and I really wish I wasn't just finding this out now, because it makes me feel lazier and dumber than I usually do (which is roughly close to Chalky White levels), but Kenneth Lay was actually a returning CEO when he fucked Enron into the history books.  Cool beans, all around.  The side article here about Steve Jobs health disclosure is already outdated, since he's now officially stepped away from running things.  Interesting Napoleonic comparisons.  Geez, it's comparison week over there.

-Here's a name you probably won't remember, unless you live in India: Satyam Computer Services.  If you want a quick explanation of why Indians will remember the name, here's your one word answer--Enron.  This is that countries version, a scandal laced company who just confessed to a $1.47 billion fraud; that, however is tip of the iceberg stuff.  Nasty shit.

-Last years 94th richest man Adolf Merckle, as ranked by Forbes, took his own life on January 5th.  He laid down on the train tracks?  That's pretty hardcore, especially for a 74 year old.  He couldn't stand to see his empire destoryed.  That empire seems to have been built on five billion euros in debt though, so...apples?  To apples?  Something like that.

-Huh, here's an article that could be an interesting enough debate.  After the nasty public response from politicians who criticized automakers for using private jets to fly to Washington DC, companies like Citigroup, AT&T, Time Warner, General Motors and Ford have started putting their corporate jets up for sale.  (In some cases though, they're listing them at prices no sane individual would pay and still using them.)  The Economist has made some points before regarding this subject, although they only touch upon it here:  some executives do need private jets, because it's more expensive to waste their time using other methods of travel then it is to use private jets.  Sure, it's unarguably a luxury for many, but most of the complaints leveled at them are by people who have never gotten the simple picture:  part of the reasons rich people hire people and pay for things that seem extraneous to the regular individual is because it would cost the companies footing the bill more to make them do it yourself.  When somebodies salary is in the billions, you don't want them picking up their dry cleaning or waiting for American Airlines to get their shit together.  Oh, and this has completely fucked up the private jet industry, but that's...well, less interesting.

Finance and Economics

-The results are in:  "Depression Babies" didn't invest in the stock market because of the way the stock market behaved in their childhood.  It's been a guesstimation for years, one that run-of-the-standard economists didn't care for, but after a Berkeley/Stanford research team-up, it seems to be true enough.  My initial reaction is that now there's a whole new level of shit people can blame on their childhood.  On the positive side, "I'm scared of investing because of mommy" is a hellaciously more interesting conversation than "Intimacy frightens me because of a lack of hugs."

-Here's a fascinating little piece of information about a massive blow-up in the Hong Kong finance market that didn't get a lot of play here, as far as I can tell.  In Hong Kong, the rule has been that companies have to release two financial result statements a year--however, they have three months past the close of mid-year business to disclose, and four months past the close for the year-end statement.  That means that the people in charge have months to play with their shares--buy, sell, whatever they like.  Insider trading, yes--but such an extensive period of time makes it incredibly easy to conceal.  Last week, the loophole was closed, banning insiders from dealing in shares at all until the results are published.  Immediately, the area exploded--236 companies protested together, the head of the largest local bank called it stupid, and there were front page advertisements talking shit.  The stock exchange--frightened and cowed--backed off, saying it won't become rule until April.  An amazing defense of a clearly unethical practice.

Science and Technology

-One of the common drums that was beaten during the eight years under Bush was the administrations distaste for science, notably the time when his own surgeon general testified to Congress that he'd had delays and "notes" forced upon him by non-medical officials in the administration.  (That's terrible, but kind of funny.  "I'm not happy with the results of your scientific survey.  Let's Republican-ize this bitch up.")  This article goes into how different Barack Obama approaches science, and it's one of those kind of articles that can't help but instill that goddamned "optimism" people seem to have lately.  It's like, all good news.  Creepy.

-George W. Bush, doing good things?  You're damn right.  Besides the 2006 agreement to designate an area in Hawaii as the world's largest marine protected area, he's just made something similar happen in three more places, which cements his presidency, oddly enough, as the "largest marine-conservation effort" in the history of the planet.

-Besides making baby pictures only about three people want to see, thank you very much but-take-that-back-to-your-desk-I-do-not-care-that-you-are-pregnant, ultrasound may turn into a cheap way to fight all kinds of brain diseases without the use of drugs or electrodes.  Nice one, that.  Now shut up about your kid.  I hope it's born with a monkey's heart, like Christian Slater.

Books and Arts

-Positive reviews keep flying in for Liaquat Ahamed's Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke The World.  No, it isn't a current events read--it's the cloak and dagger story of the global bankers of the 1920's.  Without giving away too much, a problem this review doesn't have, the classic quote from William Jennings Bryan, that these men sought to "crucify mankind upon a cross of gold" gets referenced.  Man, why the hell aren't I reading this right now?

-No half-hearted recommendation here--if you ski or snowboard, the Economist says that the new Charles English collection of ski and snow writing is a must-have, must-read book.  I'm into neither of those, but it sure sounds like it might be worthwhile nonetheless. 

-There's an art show in Edinburgh featuring Henry Moore's work in textiles.  It sounds interesting enough, although I imagine I'll forget about it when the show travels to American shores in 2009.  As opposed to some of the cultural experiences I view as unnecessary, I have some honest to God affection for the idea that there are still people in the world that spend this much thought and intelligence writing reviews of a tapestry show.  Fine art is so often the province of the elite these days that there's something altogether charming about this show.

-Sorry, but the political posters of the Lebanese civil war pale in comparison to the classic Russian propaganda pieces and they lack the "holy shit, this is crazy" aspect of the North Korean ones.  It is interesting to see something so glaringly rainbow-licious though--adds a whole level of fun to the idea of Hizbullah.

Obituary: Helen Suzman

-Suzman worked, by herself at times, to bring racial equality to South Africa long before that scene in Lethal Weapon 2 where Danny Glover says "Free South Africa, you son of a bitch."  I'm not saying that just to be sarcastic and petty, but because I think it's interesting how something that so few cared about for so long eventually became something that could get tossed into a Hollywood film script.  When you read this woman's obituary--an abbreviated version of a life that cries out for some kind of extended biography--you can't help but realize the courage, the commitment, the life she chose took.  An intimidating, powerful individual who held and fought for the loftiest (yet most basic) ideals in a time when support was in the toilet.  In some of the darkest periods of the 20th centuries history, Helen Suzman was--and will be remembered--as an honest to God hero.  She may not have achieved as much as some, but her persistence and unwavering commitment were a model for thousands--millions--to follow.

All art from the Economist unless noted otherwise below.

Who owns screengrabs from Deadwood?  HBO, I guess, that Terry Gilliam movie that makes you forgive him for the Brothers Grimm belongs to Fox now, the Sri Lankan picture belongs to the IBT, the Mills picture is from an odd website called Nigerian Muse that was hosting a bunch of other people's images without credit, but it was my favorite, the antibiotics picture is from a spam email, My Man Godfrey is in public domain now, so I'd imagine that screengrabs from it are as well and while I can't see any future moment when i'll watch Revenge of the Nerds again, I still think that Lamar guy was pretty funny.

Comments

[Jake K.]

The "cross of gold" speech was invented by William Jennings Bryan!

[Tucker Stone]

Whoops, you're absolutely right. It's fixed.

[Matthew J. Brady]

Lots of people dug my daughter's ultrasound pictures. Or maybe they were just being nice. I can't wait until you have a kid and turn into a big softie.

[AERose]

California slipped to #8 on the biggest economies list? I remember it being as high as #5.

[Tucker Stone]

It's been a few years, I think? On the economy thing? Emerging economies kicked it around a bit, but it's a nonsensical number anyway. I'm sure that 2010 will see a whole restructuring of that list, and eventually Warren Buffet is just going to be pissed they don't put him in there. He employs more people than the entire European continent alone.

Oh, and Matt: when it's people I like, and want more of, sure, I like pictures. But when it's people who spend most of the morning going "now, how do I tie these shoes again?" Yeah, I pretty much don't care.