Tuesday, 13 March 2012

Separated By A Common Language

Holy vampire-crotch, this is ridiculous.  When I first read some excerpts from it (courtesy of Daniel Larison, who has his own take-down here), I assumed it was another all-too-common case of a reporter writing about a country they know nothing about in order to make a domestic point.  But no, Gardiner is writing about Cameron's upcoming US visit for a British audience.  So there's really no excuse.
David Cameron’s visit to the United States this week is a lost opportunity. In addition to meeting with the President, Cameron should be reaching out to Republican leaders and the American conservative movement.
Larison's counters are characteristically good, but he tackles Gardiner's lunatic ideas in terms of how they would affect US/UK relations.  Nothing wrong with that, obviously.  I'm particularly amused by the idea that it's a good idea to snub the actual President in order to get in with the guy who might get the chance to maybe be President next (one wonders how low Cameron will need to sink in the polls before Gardiner suggests Obama get chummy with Ed Milliband).

There's another important issue to consider, though, which Larison doesn't touch - the UK response to Cameron's trip.  Gardiner's most laughable idea - remember, this guy is a Washington-based political commentator who writes for a British conservative paper - is that because a plurality of Americans are self-identified conservatives, the Tories must be closest ideologically to the Republicans.

That's it.  That's the sum total of his argument. Whomever conservatives vote for in one country is automatically the ally of whomever conservatives vote for in another country.  Political positions, party platforms, cultural ideals, none of that shit matters.  The most right wing major parties must always be bestest buds forever, and so British conservatives must think the Republicans are aces.

The actual truth is that if Cameron was very, very lucky, meeting with Mitt Romney or Eric Cantor would cause no appreciable drop in domestic polling. Whilst I don't think the UK public is particularly familiar with the specific ins and outs of US politics, the belief that George W Bush was a lunatic simpleton is deeply ingrained, as is the feeling that Sarah Palin is a vapid rabble-rouser.  McCain was seen as an inveterate bumbler.  The best thing I've heard anyone say about Mitt Romney is that he hasn't said or done anything ludicrous, but that's because he hasn't said or done anything.

This is the legacy of international exposure that Cameron should be desperate to tie himself to?   That would have struck me as profoundly unconvincing even before the recent wave of anti-abortion laws and anti-contraception diatribes, which for whatever reason have not gone unnoticed over here.  There might not be enough US-savvy Brits to make too much of a difference, but to the extent opinion over such meetings would exist at all, it would be almost unanimously negative.

Whatever the actual political similarities between the GOP and the Tories (which are far less than the similarities between the Democrats and the Tories, no matter what Gardiner wants to tell his readers), there is a non-trivial section of the UK public who now sees the Republican leadership as somewhere between insane and actively evil.   Cameron is doubtless also fully aware of the damage Blair took by playing lap-dog to the last Republican president.  There may come a time when Dave feels he's going to have to swallow his fears (and, one assumes, no small amount of bile) and work closely with the Republicans, if and when they take the Oval.  I can't imagine any reason why he'd want to start ahead of time.

And what exactly would be the upside to meeting someone like Eric Cantor? So Cameron can be told that the problem with the UK is we’re too nice to gay people, immigrants, women and any country other than the US and Israel (and maybe Argentina)?  I don’t think it’s hard to see why he’s taking a pass on that.

Monday, 12 March 2012

What, Already?

Happy birthday, this, my blog.


Four years, 1355 posts, and over two and a half thousand comments.  Plus almost 40 000 adoring fans (NOTE: some fans may be counted twice, but only because of how much they adore me).

Thanks to everyone who takes time to read this blog, whether it be to agree, disagree, like, hate, pity, or even just proof-read.

PS: I stole the picture above from here: a nice wholesome colouring site for tech-competent children.

PPS: When in Gallini's name are blogspot going to let "blog" get through the spell-check?  Maybe next year...

Friday, 9 March 2012

Friday Talisman: Some Kind Of Wizard

The forces of evil (as well as purveyors of crushed velvet) get themselves a boost this month: the Machiavellian wizard has arrived.

Also on the painting schedule: some reinforcements for my Dark Angels;

a slowly-progressing ship of the line;

and a stark reminder that giant conglomerations of long-lost spaceships are probably things best avoided.


Wednesday, 7 March 2012

Deep (And Bitter) Thought

Coventry bus timetables are to commuting what Russ-Feingold is to finance reform: they're so toothless as to be completely ignored by those they ostensibly regulate, but at least they give us something specific to point to through our impotent howls as we're being shafted by faceless overlords.

(I've spent a total of 95 minutes waiting for my last three buses, and over two and a half hours for my last six.  This is despite turning up on time for one, and early for the other five.  At this point, I doubt National Express could find any other way to screw up short of hiring yucca plants for drivers or setting their vehicles on flames every seventeen minutes.  And who the Hell decides the best times for a twice-hourly bus are twenty past and half past?  Not that it matters, since both show up on the hour anyway.)

Tuesday, 6 March 2012

Victimless Crimes

The Catholic bigwigs just can't stop themselves from piling on the crazy:
Cardinal O’Brien wrote for the Sunday Telegraph, in which he likened gay marriage to slavery.
He wrote: “Imagine for a moment that the Government had decided to legalise slavery but assured us that ‘no one will be forced to keep a slave’.
“Would such worthless assurances calm our fury? Would they justify dismantling a fundamental human right? Or would they simply amount to weasel words masking a great wrong?”
...
"I would say that countries where this is legal are indeed violating human rights."
So, in this analogy, what, homosexuals are slave-owners?  Then who are the slaves?  Not O'Brien, clearly, he's another potential slave owner.  He just wants us to know that "you won't be forced into the position of plantation owner" strikes him as no better or worse than "you won't be forced into the position of being taking up the arse by one of those nancies you've heard about".

As usual, the bigots end up proving my point for me.  Gay marriage isn't a threat to anyone or anything, which O'Brien ably demonstrates by constructing an analogy to slavery in which he can't actually identify the people analogous to slaves.  It's also no small tell that by O'Brien's own choice of analogy, it isn't the freedom of citizens that's the human right with which he is concerned, but rather the right of those in authority to issue blanket bans of activities of which they disapprove. 

In short, O'Brien's argument implicitly begins with the phrase "Imagine being married to another man was as bad as being a slave.  Therefore..."

Apparently this guy is at the very head of the Catholic Chuch in Scotland.  Which, if nothing else, makes me rather pro-independence than I had been before.  If flashing my passport at the border is the price for having this guy's influence in Westminster severed completely, then I'd consider it a fair price.

Saturday, 3 March 2012

A Tale Of Cocktails #23

Choc Berry

Ingredients

Mug of milk
1 tbsp cocoa
1 oz Chambord
1 oz Triple Sec

Taste: 9
Look: 8
Cost: 8
Name: 9
Prep: 8
Alcohol: 1
Overall: 7.7

Preparation:  Warm the milk.  Stir in first the cocoa, then the alcohol.  Place on a plate garnished with a marshmallow and a mint chocolate stick.

General Comments:  Ooh!  An interactive cocktail!  I didn't consider this possibility when I first conceived of this experiment.  I've added one to the taste value, instead.  After all, if dunking chocolate and marshmallows smothered in warm, sweet milk-based drinks aren't what tickles your fancy, then I don't think there's any hope for you.

Even with such confectionary momentarily placed to one side, this is delicious. It could maybe do with being a fraction sweeter, but then that's what I think about cocoa in general.  The raspberry and orange flavours certainly help in that regard, but I wonder if this would work even better with one of the sweeter hot chocolates out there. 

That's a small niggle, though.  This is a quite delightful drink, just the thing on a cold winter evening (which means that with typical luck, I've discovered it too late), and the low alcohol content means it doesn't feel too cheeky.

Also: best... name... ever.