The Valediction of Jay Leno - A Decade Plus 7 in the Tonight Show: A Tribute

Right from the start of me publishing my first scribbles in my blog (this blog!), I was overwhelmingly in full-blown excitement to write something about the best shows in television today (Thank you, Jack TV!). I can remember a little bit of history how I got my way through watching comedy shows - which I appreciate cordially down to the end. I first saw Conan's show - The Late Night. I was quite reluctant (and void and vapid in curiosity) to even bother watching it. Well, a few weeks later, I kind'a liked it -  a lot (on which timeline I was just a juvenile fan of Mad TV). Anyway, as my passion for comedy shows progressed, Jack TV's comedy shows also integrate - there David Letterman's show begun appearing etc. I think it's a good investment in television to broadcast award-winning shows, i.e., NBC shows because a fan like myself would indulge into it - for sure. Anyway, enough of my chronicles about my love of comedy shoes, especially talkshows - let's go to the main issue - an be aware of proper verbiage.

 At first, I didn't consider The Tonight Show with Jay Leno as compelling and comedic as that of Conan's. I mean, of course, they have different styles - Conan's seemingly bewitched me with his ....ahem..... humor - but Jay's was just not enough for me to even smile a bit. I finally, about last year, I think, I tried to move on and try Jay Leno for more comedy aside from Conan (at which point, I begun loving Late Show with David Letterman, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report among others) . Unfortunately, the early advent of my appreciation of Jay's show seemed to be short of phase as he is to leave after. I first got the cue in Time Magazine that he is leaving this year, to be succeded by Conan himself who happens to have left The Late Night earlier before Jay and who was replaced by the incompetent Jimmy Fallon. Sorry Jimmy. Anyway, let's put this in focus to Jay. Ok. Before Jay succeded the legend Johnny Carson, Jay was already a rising comedian and celebrity. 1992 when Carson left The Tonight Show, with Jay to replace him. I may not have seen the first days and weeks of Jay's show, but I am sure he did an impact and started effectively to make an imprint of legacy for the show (by the way, I like Billy Crystall's song for Jay, he being his very first guest). So, after 17 years, it was more of a legacy and fulfillment for Jay - it was rather a legacy and an achievement in the history of talk shows. 

Now, let's talk about the last days of The Tonight Show. I was fully immersed and alert for the last few weeks to see the last shows. It was beginning to be a bit nostalgic - but it can hardly be seen that Jay begins to be dramatic. They started to show for the last time what happened in the Tonight Show for the past seventeen years - there was the famous montage of funny Jaywalking moments, Jay's phony news on politicians, parodies etc. The show started to have only one guest. The first to the last show, which guest is the comedian Billy Crystall who as aforesaid is the very first guest of Jay (You aren't familiar with Billy? Uhm, how about Mike from Monsters, Inc., you know, the green, one-eyed/cyclop funny monster?) was very funny and melodramatic (although you can't even see Jay tearing down at the very least). I liked Billy's song, can't wait to have a it. I liked Prince's performance too - a worthy tribute for Jay.  Anyway, the last show with Conan as the guest was more dramatic. The conversation between the two was but pleasing each other, saying good things and good lucks for their individual career. Oh, I have to mention the clip that was shown featuring Conan's first TV appearnce moments after he was chosen to replace David Letterman in the Late Night! I was really amused on how shy and a bit modest and physically different and ridiculous in front of the cameras Conan was (where he had nothing to fire back as Jay begun teasing him). Anyway, at the end of the show, Jay begun to thank everyone, his colleagues, writers, producers, friends and his wife Mavis - it was very sad but fulfilling after 17 years. Gonna miss Jaywalking, gonna miss Arnold Schwarzenneger impersonation, gonna miss everything. To Jay, be the best. ! You are now a legend!

UPDATE: North Korea under watchful eye of world powers, UN

The predicament regarding DPRK's antagonistic actions (first, breaching six-party agreement and a UN resolution by launching a missile test last April, followed by detonating a nuclear bomb with equal power as that of the one dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, next, launching more missiles - worse amongst all - they are ready to attack any hostile enemies within their jurisdiction) is smearing global alert on North's possible nuclear attack against its enemies. This week, the North addressed its extreme intention to apply destructive impunity against those who come near and within the nation's terriroty. This was a paranoid response from the Communist nation after some US vessels had reconnaissance, with the cooperation of South Korea, near North Korea's shores. Russia, China, Japan and South Korea, countries nearest to the North's territory are having the hardest alert on this. Being near the proximity of an inimical and bellicose country is definitely an alarm for the national security of these countries. The intensity of negative criticism from world powers and the United Nations is rising as the North is begetting provocation for the rest of the world to respond to their challenge. This is an unexpected situation of possibly resulting to a 21st century all-out nuclear war - and the first to spark it is a poor, Asian country! Following the condemnation of UN, the North became more pugnacious, captious and argumentative against the rest, fuelling both sides with aggression and taunting action witht he use of force. On this matter, we can no longer expect the same patience from the international community as the North is exacerbating international response of disapproval and loathe. There is no room for Mr. Nice Guy! What happens even worse is that there is greater possibility (as I predicted in my early post regarding the April launch) that some will ally themselves to join the North against its enemies. What to further expect out of this is a significant amount of destruction whenever deterence happens. Collateral damage is an issue, and will always be. For now, the North is under watchful eyes under intense alertness of possible missile strike. What to hope for is tha punity shall never reach the agora of politics. But things are getting even worse before they get better.

The over-aggression of some Conservatives (in media) against the Left is unnecessary hostility and nefarious cynicism!

Conservative media blabber-mouths like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and the rest of the belligerents against the Left are spending most of their time under cynical will-power attacking the Democrats in Capitol Hill who are under the leadership of their (the Conservatives) archnemesis, Pres. Barack Obama. If you notice, O'Reilly and Hannity are from the Fox News Channel, the often mocked, attacked and considered biased in news journalism - mainly the Haven of the Republicans and the Hot Seat of the Democrats. I admit I am fond watching The O'Reilly Factor, but not the unprovoking Hannity - but I do know what they naturally do: to always be conceited about being Conservatives and have nefarious modus operandi against the Liberals - almost all the time. Rush Limbaugh, the outspoken, cigar-loving, provocative radio host (not affiliated to Fox but a hardcore Conservative himself) is one of the High Circles of Anti-Liberal Ethos - the fiercest of them all - the "unofficial" vigilante for the GOP - and the thin ice for them. Dick Morris, among others (by the way, I subscribe columns from his website - just being curious and inquisitive) is the underground assassin for the GOP. Well, to put it mildly, they all share the same aim: demonize the Liberals and salvage the GOP - and to prove that Conservative views are better than what the Left holds. Anyway, as I was pointing out people like them (much less for Dick Morris though) tend to stray away from a "fair and balanced" (I got this from the Fox News Channel - some sort of mockery out of irony) news coverage, much more on bigotry against Liberal views. Their hostility is pissing me off so badly. I was well aware that Fox News (I watch it, I subscribe from it, etc.) is the Republican media powerhouse, with its counterpart, the New York Times for the Democrats, respectively. I have to give credit in here to colleague of mine for motivating me to have a more critical look at the biased situation going on the channel - by observing how they do their job. Of course, it had a remarkable result - Fox News Channel people, many but not all, do favor Republican views and attack more on the Democrats'. There really is an antagonistic approach (against the Left) when it comes to news analysis relatively. This over-aggression from some Conservative hosts is a matter of attack to demise and undermine and stain the Democrats whenever they are in news. I don't mean to side to either of the parties - what I am expressing largely enough though is the nefarious wishful thinking from the Conservative hosts who prejudice news casting. There is a biased orientation on the matter of news judgment. Simply, they are taking it too far unnecessarily. Last month, Rush, Dick among others took it to the edge by wishing that Democrat-crafted policies and Obama himself will fail. It's an absolute cynicism! What an abominable deathwish they got! Taking advantage of the media expected to be fair (which is always expected from diabolically-motivated attackers) to tarnish enemies isn't just right enough to consider professional, rather personal. Bill, Sean, Dick, Rush, I admire all of you for your eloquence and everything else but pushing setbacks and biases just to win a war are but cowardice. Don't be cynics. guys. Liberals and Democrats in your shows always got the hardest treatment. Just be fair enough.

Tom Hanks with David Letterman - Reasons to admire the "The Forrest Gump"

Ok, first of all, I've been a later fan of Tom Hanks (maybe in my early teenage and later more imminent in adulthood). I haven't watched Forrest Gump yet, but I do mind putting it in the title of this post  - worse - I've seen just a few of his movies, I can't even remember some of the titles. But I'm proud having to see Castaway (standing ovation and lots of rounds of applause for the acting), so as his first, blockbuster hit movie this 21st century - The Da Vinci Code. He didn't only caused uproars and outcries (negative and positive) both from the fans and the critics (to include as well the Catholic Church) but did he empowered his image not just the iconic Robert Langdon from the film but the messianic Tom Hanks! The evolution of Tom's character - from a dimwit to a miraculous surviror of a plane crash to a cerebral, enigmatic academic - is truly a mark of his versatility in acting. That's why I admire his acting skills - he just can play any role in Hollywood - and he is the best suited to play it, no doubt - no room to argue for. Anyway, as I was supposed to talk about, Tom Hank's guesting on the Late Show with David Letterman was truly awe-inducing entertainment. To compare with the roles he played both in the Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons (where by the way, he no longer has the ridiculous hair-do, speaking of it, Tom himself called his Da Vinci hair-do "diabolical") who is mainly a geeky, adventurous guy with Symbology education in Harvard who happens to have many girls with him all the time , Tom resembles Robert Langdon a lot, only that Tom in real life has more wit and humor than the academically-focused Robert. But the beauty of the two movies and roles he is playing is that you don't see any ramifications and vagrance from the real Tom Hanks. It seems that the character is not Robert Langdon but Tom himself. You just don't see the Robert Langdon-ish essesnce from the movie, rather the Tom Hanks with some typical Tom Hanks personality to, of course, fit the movie fictionally. Anyway, it seems that I am, too, a vagrant. As I was talking about the Late Show, Tom did suck the interview, I mean, he sat there beaming with fame and cerebral aura that he is to be considered one of the best guests in any talk show I've seen. Talking a about his diablocial hair back in the Da Vinci movie to the odd counterpart name of "firemen" in Italy which is by the way Vigilantes of Fire in Italian - he didn't just talk for the sake of talking, he charmed the audience with, again, the best comedic shot from an unofficially and not professionally comedian. That's it: the reasons why to admire Tom Hanks himself - he is intelligent, smart, wise, witty and an accomplished actor. You just can't get away with it. 

N. Korea Against The World: Kim's Hard-headedness Is Everybody's Fear

Only last month that North Korea tried to taunt the global body politic by launching a test missile which they defend it was just a rocket to carry satellites while the rest who doubts considered it a nefarious decision. As a result, many condemned the action - - but North Korea felt bullied, unfortunately. Condemnations from the United Nations even further aggrieved the North Korean government, making them ballistic and "literally" ballistic this time. As a response to the global condemnation of what is ought to be a global threat out of the launch, Kim wants more provocation - by launching more. As aggressive as they get, superpowers like US and China is begotten out of their action - - they, too, are becoming alert against N. Korea. If Kim Jong-Il challenges the world, we expect more from the world - destructively with no more diplomatic tenderness. Diplomacy has reached N. Korea's ears many, many times but it seems no one is listening - no one wants to, nobody attempts to. Then the global community is fed up of Kim's uncooperative approach to global rule of law - as he makes him law itself. But international community knows N. Korea's isolationist character - what is feared presently is its capability to start a war. If you're going to fear fear itself, count North Korea in. Now, North Korea is staging a global popularity out of their resistance and provocative action to draw attention that they are capable like others - while we fear the threats of terrorism, I suppose we have to line Kim with Osama as men of might grandstand ready to blow anyone's asses off. God Save The World.

By the way, to make something horrible out of the missile launch, imagine any present city in the world will experience the same thing what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki more than 50 years ago.....coz know what.....N. Korea is capable of making the same destructive force as the bomb did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki during WW II. (Enola Gay was the plane that dropped the bomb.) Think again........

Congratulations, Kris and Adam!

My first impressions on the AI '09 result? (On that very day I woke up early beyond my normal, dramatic late-day oversleeping - a record for the first time since I spent my summer obsessing myself to academic affairs, etc.) I can hardly put it in my vertigo-inducing rage, shock and disbelief. Yes.. I didn't expect the result that way but that's the way it had to be. A damning feeling crawled to my spine (quite literary?), mostly a mixture of apoplectic denial, bone-chilling outcry and stand-up monologue of mockery, ridicule and criticism against Kris. Yes, I admit I was too harsh on Kris, ever since he got into the Top 5. - I'd rather have Anoop than Kris. But damn good 'ol fate seemed to favoring Kris this time, worse, defeating the ever-talented, omnipotently-amazing vocalist and undoubtedly true rockstar of California Adam Lambert. But the shocks and the revolts caught me long ago when Matt Giraud got booted off, to be followed by the less-compelling, vocally-unattractive Allison Iraheta then the enormously-groundshaking result for Danny Gokey to leave the Idol stage itself. Simply put it this way: Giraud, Desai, Lambert and Gokey are far way better than Kris, much less than Allison. Yes, I am writing what I felt for Kris and the rest of the unsung, worthy, deserving artists who are supposed to fill the musical interest and euphoria of the American people and the world. But enough is enough - Kris got it, Adam didnt, nor Danny nor anyone else. Kris may have reached the audience far better than Adam (where Kris uses conventionally mellow, stale vocals while Adam naturally adopts high-note, versatile, provoking, idiosyncratic voices)- the dark horse, underdog, melodramatic smooth vocalist sucked it up. But I recant all my harsh tomatoes against Kris  - I rather give him the best luck out of the contract. And for Adam, there are a lot of fruitful future for you to dominate (with your high-pitching voice that made Katie Holmes cover Suri's ears). Same as for Danny, Allison and the rest - may you suck your way through fame. Congratulations.

(My) Top 10 Television Shows of All Time

(In random order.....I just can't rate them coz' they're just equally, overwhelmingly great TV preoccupations.)

1. Late Night with Conan O'Brien (No longer on air - replaced by Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. Conan, however, is going to host The Tonight Show, replacing good 'ol Jay.)

2. Family Guy (On par with the Simpsons but undisputed in true humor and wit. So awesome a comedy, indeed....totally.)

3. House, M.D. (Hugh Laurie is really admirable and powerful.)

4. How I Met Your Mother (A montage of comedy and comedy and comedy.....and comedy.)

5. CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, CSI:New York, CSI: Miami (Mystery solving is one hell worth of human flesh.)

6. The Office (American version starring Steve Carrell.......who happens to be a true and ineffective actor for the show. I just love Steve. You should, too.)

7. Chelsea Lately (Honesty is the best comedy......but Chuey isn't necessary for the show. The Daily Round Table is enough to make you laugh drop-dead.)

8. Saturday Night Live (love the guests, especially Chris Walken and Shia Labeouf)

9. The Simpsons (A legend in its very humor.)

10. 30Rock (The genius of Tina Fey, Alec Baldwin and the rest rules!)

Honorary Inductees:

= Mad TV

= The Tonight Show with Jay Leno

= Late Show with David Letterman

= Late Night with Jimmy Fallon

= Chuck

= Nip/Tuck

GOP starts a momentum: Obama's disadvantage is their gain

DEMS. minus CONFIDENCE is GOP.

Upon the defeat of the GOP both in the presidential and congressional elections this year (with the unexpected shift of many Republican states towards the Democratic party), the becoming-loose-and-oblivious principles of the party itself that left the populace doubting if it has a dominating future in politics (as to expect it obviously, Bush made impact to it - and Obama weakened them, too, during the campaign - while McCain and Palin unknowingly hurt their own side) and the fresh mindset that the inabilitty of the previous administration to make popular approval extends the horror to the entire GOP, it seemed that for them, Obama's and Capitol Hill's domineering famousness and omnipotence brought doom to them for good - - - yet it may not be for long this time. The present political and economic anxiety America is experiencing right now did give way for Obama to overturn the previous mistake of Bush 43, but the unexpected turns and twists seem to burder him [Obama] - and his burden pushes hope for the GOP. There are three factors that took away the crown, the scepter and the orb from the Republicans, mainly failed policies and actions in many issues: (1) war in Iraq which resulted to nothing but ineffective actions to maintain properly what is left of the ruin nation out of the rubbles from the pointless war, (2) absence of attention to the already-present economic setback and (3) local and foreigh policies (healthcare system, moral issues, Katrina, almost-closed door diplomacy. These failures may have anteceded the disapperaing confidence on the party that largely affected their chance to take the presidential leadership, but the war isn't over as long as the present presidential leader and the rest of his actions with his Democrat colleagues in Washington are disadvantged in many ways. The hugely disputed economic stimulus bill can prove who works better by weighing it. At first, Obama didn't get too much support from the legislators, even from his doubting partymates (luckily he got close-call 60% to have it approved) with surprising support from a very few Republicans. Upon its implementation, criticsim seeps down to the Obama administration. The GOP had their own supposed version of the bill but failed against the dominating party. The biggest issue on the matter is the amount the Federal government will spend out of the bill: a whooping 1 trillion dollar worth of law. The question from the opposition concerns the deficit it may bring and the risk it can cause to the future America with no money in hand. It might be contentious for now but it's making impact to the Americans, so as to the president himself. Early this week, Obama himself admitted the high probability of deep deficits out of his policies, citing healthcare reform as one of the biggest spending (it's very horrible and hurting for the Americans if they receive no satisfactory result from the policy, especially if they lose healthcare insurance and the rest of Obama's promises, but hopefully, the president won't fail them - - not now nor never). Of course, the GOP (the watchdogs) is there to make something beneficial out of the news. If they use such to let the people know how preposterous Obama's plans are and will-be plans by citing his retractions, adoption of previous Republican policies under Bush, say, Guantanamo policies but not closing it at all and seemed-to-be ineffective recent policies, Obama may be in grave danger now or in 2012 while GOP comes back in strength out of the Democrats' pedigree of misfortunes. But it's up to the American people to be gullible or open minded to such real politicking between the Reps. and the Dems. as they (The GOP) crave for the need of resume of dominance in power.

Partisanship Ensues Bigotry: Thoughts On Closed-Mindedness and Defeatist Principles

If one sides himself/herself to a specific principled body (if they are principled in the first place) and he/she allies himself/herself to a set of exclusive norms and views, the risk occurs when instances of bigotry is inevitable. (For a traditionalist, eugenics and teleology are important aspects of the upsurge of civilizations, ancient or contemporary. For a nihilist, these are but irrelevant, oblivious turds that do not necessitate human need - one attacks the other.) I would express from here on that I do not extend my attack on whatever view somebody holds, whatever belief system and manifesto he/she does follow - my essential thesis is about the danger, the circumstance and the clarity of bigotry occuring and to be manifested upon such partisan belief. 

I know several people who are worse than bastardized morons and poltroon bigots - often so dumb and enormously biased that they no longer respect and consider the views of others. I know some who make their best pride because they are allied to a specific belief that they boisterously show the world that they are always right. I remember once I suggested in one of my classes that a debate or any class activity with argumentive way of discourse would better off us students because we are able to see both sides of a specific issue, view, etc. Unfortunately, the professor of that class instead replied as if trying to refute and dismiss my suggestion by considering it hostile rather than academic and intellectual in its very nature, "Doing so is like being God". I'm sure if there was any atheist in that class, he/she would have his/her grin and then speaking something in his/her favor specific to his/her view while I applaud her/him. Anyway, that professor surely has something biased contention with him. The risk of partisanship I am to subject my argument to is that isolation to a view tends the "isolationist" to reject any outlandish view from the view he/she is clinging to. The danger then precedes extreme bias and unintellectual mentality to the "unwelcome usurper". To put it mildly, he/she who holds extreme faith and pride (often claiminng it right) of the view, belief, etc. she/he is bound to subject his/her entire thinking to an isloated mentality that places a risk of unwelcoming others' view of the world. Bigotry then overwhelms him/her, abridging freedom of expression of some through his/her own accord of dumb assumption. It isn't only self-defeating, intellectually- and rationally-demeaning but also constructive closed-mindedness. These people are the worst of modern-day cynics holding backward opinions on somebody else's points of view. This is but a defeatist, retroactive way of thinking that limits open discourse and spread of intellectual multipolarism. These people are pure obscurantists. Here, I again expressively respect whatever views some hold. I only argue on the circumstance of bigotry occuring in a partisan way of thinking. I neither reject atheism nor theism, eitherway provides points of view, may it be compelling or dumbfounded - respect of views are necessary. I don't side myself to a conservative or liberal point of view, it's better to be in between and weigh the beneficiality they bring (which is by it's intrinsic cause is the end for humanity). I admire Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, John McCain, Barack Obama and the rest of the clashing parties - one thing I don't admire is when they subject themselves to bigotry against the other party. It isn't bad to read articles about scientists rejecting global warming nor bishops rejecting Holocaust, we rather gain resolve out of historicity and rationality to weigh what is better and true, not to say something against another's opinion. We must not ridicule, nor reject views without proper depth and breadth of understanding out of it - we weigh them to attain benefitting end. We don't do prejudice, just reasonableness.

I am open for scrutiny which I shall respect, to which I shall offer my defense out of pure intellectual response, not assumption and whim. 

DEBATE IS OPEN.

A Victory for Sri Lanka - Lessons To Reclaiming Peace Amidst War

It's usual for the academics and the concerned (but rare for the ninnies and ultimate morons and fools) to ask the obverse situation that could've happened instead of what was written in our history books. What could have happened to US if the Confederacy won over the Union? What could have been the state of Europe and the rest of the world if Hitler defeated the Allied Powers? Will he be the Alexander the Great of his time? What would have happened if the Spanish Armada crushed Elizabeth's fleet? What would be England now?

It isn't hard to predict the "otherwise" event of another event. Possibilities are always open to rain in everyone's parade. 

Later this year, May, the 25-year civil war in Sri Lanka finally ended  - a relenteless battle between the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil Tigers (officially named Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam [LTTE]), where countless innocent civilians are trapped between guns and are used as "human defense system". I may not be there to witness the atrocious situation of the victims, I'm sure it's a mixed emotion of pity and anything emotionally-reaching to picture out the horrid crimes being committed. Anyway, it seemed that fortune and justice is served for the righteous takers - the infidels gone, surge of peace and democracy in Sri Lanka finally  and happily filled everyone's relief. What could be the major step of the Sri Lankan government to finally make actions that contributed to the Tamil Tigers' setbacks? There's no doubt technology played a vital role into this. Access to the den of the LTTE (with the help of military intelligence, etc., of course) undoubtedly was the solution. I am not sure if the government used other means of weakening the enemy, say, finances that support the rebel enemy. Countries like Colombia, Afghanistan and Pakistan target the financial sources of rebels (FARC in Colombia, Taliban [possibly, Al Qaeda] in both Afghanistan and Pakistan) - like poppy. Use of this tactics is not a guarrantee to winning, arms dealers still make way through these infidels which provide military power for the enemies. Any of these tactical measures are being adopted anywhere (arms supply is yet a hard task but tracking dealers is being on the security measures) - lessons on how to effectively defeat the enemy. What's left is effective brains from the government infested with these infidels. 

The Villar Ethics Complaint Case

As days narrow down for aspiring presidential runners (presidentiables, ambitious-posers, etc.) and as competition readies earlier as expected, front-runners for the 2010 Presidential Election have what it take to do everything to make a point for the people to recognize their potential, while some will conspire "captiously" like poltroons or desperate gluttons just to cause downfall of another competitor. True enough, though, that politics stays as it is. And furthermore, politics breeds politics - every political man/woman will do things unimaginable for victory. 

  Yesterday, the Ethics Complaint Case against Sen. Villar begun. As always expected, the matter is not immune to parlay, that is, people side. As senators begun the preliminary investigation (which is only to focus on procedure of weighing substantial credible evidence against the accused - which is to say, if the accuser has the enough evidence beyond reasonable doubt for Senate to adjudicate guilt or innocence of Villar), the usual situation happens - dispute, awkward exchange or words between enemies, friends and turncoats. Well, technically speaking, the investigation resumes on 26th of May. Yesterday was just the first phase, that is, the senators voted to hold the investigation which will progress to the second stage - the adjudicatory stage. 

The ethics complaint revolves around Sen. Villar's alleged connection with the C5 road construction somewhere in Paranaque that involves his business (hence, there is allegation of breach of ethics  - conflict of interest - breach of check and balances).

Is Obama The Master of Retraction?

What made Obama win last November is his rhetorical promising of platforms that do really impact and galvanize the popular interest and want, given that the vapid situation of the economy needs to be fixed, so as the confidence from the entire American populace - and Obama made clear better than McCain's all-but-demolishing-his-opponent's-repute that issues on the economy, terrorism, Guantanamo and other necessitating foreign and security policies are to be considered focal points for the next administration. As wise as he could be, Obama in his first 100 days made a pretty good job, especially on the matters of the Democrat-designed economic stimulus plan and on multilateralism - he was wise enough to let his 100 days in office to pass with immaculate cleanliness and sincerity and spend the next years contradicting himself. Yes, Obama does have a confidence rating than Bush. Yes, he had a landslide in popular vote. Yes, he tries not to be a bigot, rather a local and international diplomat (as he tries to venture to bi-partisanship with the soft and extreme Conservatives). But no one is perfect enough to stand strong amidst changing issues, changing possibilities, changing instances. Let's face it, almost every politician these days are ironies to themselves. Early this month, Obama made several recantings, especially on promises he promised to give when elected and some new promises that didn't last that long. For example, the issue on closing Guantanamo prison dented positive response from the mob, the Democrats and some Republicans. Of course, such issue didn;t reallyy make him win, but let's explore what it can do to affect the President. Obama, during his campaign, promised to close the prison - and he promised to do it days after his inauguration. However, he didn't. Worse, he retracted from his promise. (issue on where to relocate Guantanamo inmates became a constraint of reasonableness). early this month, Obama decided not to close the prison and mass relocate the prisoners (including some notorious and high-profile terrorists), rather, apply judicial action to them. It's a pretty bold move that Bush failed to see - because really it's hard and time-consuming. Hence, they want to bring them to court and find if they are guilty. (in the first place, the negative reactions about the prison is that almost all inmates are accused criminals, not being given proper justiciable action to prove them guilty of crime they are being charged). There's really nothing wrong with the prison (except from some unlawful interrogation procedures being done like torture), as long as detention is legal and judicial. Hence, Obama's obverse decision does serve justice to unproven-guilty inmates and perpetuates proper procedural detention, terminating unlawful actions and authorization (read Administrative Law Goes To War in the Harvard Law Review website). Therefore, his retraction does not really offer some kind of problematic dilemma, just making sure things are being done properly. 

International News and Issues

1. Aung Suu Kyi's trial.

2. Election Commencement in India.

3. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi under scrutiny over her briefing by the CIA on interrogation tactics in 2003 which involved waterboarding.

4. Sen. Villar under probe and inquiry for ethical violations involving his real estate business and the C5 road construction.

The Case of the Torture Photos

Enough of the long-failed Bush war in Iraq. Enough of another war in Afghanistan and one in Pakistan, or soon, in North Korea as they gain aggressive unreasonableness to taunt further their superpower enemies. Enough of Randy Jackson's useless judgment in AI '08. Here's a major issue, the Abu Ghraib torture pictures are stirring the Capitol Hill, Obama himself, his administration, his contradictions and the rest of the world. Yes, as we always expect, clashes of foul talks and blabber mouths between the Conservatives and Liberals, the Republicans and the Democrats alike are surely noisy and predictable, but reactions and responses from the photos? All the same - those are epitome of pure abomination, cruelty, perpetuity of crime against man, war crime, etc. Yes, the photos are abominations. Indeed. Infuriating. Stupid. Baseless. Actions out of pure whim. Dilemma. Danger. And what can be done? Everyone knows what those American soldiers did to the detainees - hideous maltreatment of war prisoners. Who's to be blamed? Who infringes what? Who's at risk? Well, an issue came out - the official release of the photos to the public for them to scrutinize how abominable those pictures are. The question is: what happens when the photos are released or not? The government had its initial decision to release the photos to the public, but the President himself overruled such course of action as it may bring unwanted results. The case is: if the photos are released to unlimited number and kind of audience around the world, it may spark outrage from the cobelligerents of the detainees involved, that is, it will only anger more the enemies in war, worse, the nation involved. As what has been reported, bad responses have been going out from civilians involved in the battlefield, granting they are their compatriots and it may even hurt them further. The risk is that it may endanger the US troops further more from the extremist militants and even the militants themselves become more aggressive and cruel because of the inhuman treatment of their colleagues. And of course, if the photos aren't released at all, the above situations are still probable, given that some of the photos are circulating all over (it even reached already the nation involved), and those were enough to cause uproars. The American Civil Liberties Union is the major proponent, however, for the release of the photos, having with them the argument of transparency from the government (as what Obama promised long time ago, and with his decision on the photos, the right-wing is criticizing him even more as he begins to stray from his principles) and the right of the citizens to know about them, for them to judge the actions of the government on such critical issue. Whether or not those mistakes ( I mean to refer to the photos) are to be exposed, either way stands risks for Obama and the rest of the US. If they want them, expect more danger from the jihadists as retaliation is always a matter of supposition and fact. If they want to keep them for good, Obama hence is breaking his promise of a transparent government, as critics have been watching him on such issue. It's up for them to weigh the price. 

Five Things the Pope Must Do on His Mideast Visit

Powered by    * Please note, the sender's email address has not been verified.       You have received the following link from the_archivist@yahoo.com:             Click the following to access the sent link:       Five Things the Pope Must Do on His Mideast Visit*               *This article can also be accessed if you copy and paste the entire address below into your web browser. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1896715,00.html

Republicans in Distress: Is the Party Over?

Powered by    * Please note, the sender's email address has not been verified.       You have received the following link from the_archivist@yahoo.com:             Click the following to access the sent link:       Republicans in Distress: Is the Party Over?*               *This article can also be accessed if you copy and paste the entire address below into your web browser. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1896588,00.html

Hamas Claims U.S. and Europe are Reaching Out

Powered by    * Please note, the sender's email address has not been verified.       You have received the following link from the_archivist@yahoo.com:             Click the following to access the sent link:       Hamas Claims U.S. and Europe are Reaching Out*               *This article can also be accessed if you copy and paste the entire address below into your web browser. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1897071,00.html