A Boy & His Blog

Is it just me, or does that line have an odd ring to it? I mean, not that long ago, "Greetings, one and both" would have been decidedly more fitting. And yet now, believe it or not, we have it on good authority that there are four―count 'em, four!―regular readers of these pages. (If one can be said to be a regular reader of a most irregularly published blog, that is. I'll leave that for you to puzzle out, if I may.)

How can one be certain that A Boy & His Blog is the object of such runaway popularity, you ask? Quite simple, really. A quartet of kind souls have been so good as to inquire after my health and well-being since our last get-together. Scarcely deserving of that kind of solicitude, I'm moved, truly thankful, and heartily encouraged―all questions of said friends' dubious reading habits aside. As it happens, I'm happy to report that Yours Truly is as hale and hearty as ever, and as full of vim and vigor as the next blogger. Or in my case, perhaps, the next provisional apprentice blogger novitiate wannabe, second class. Hey, as I see it, I've got nowhere to go but up!

But now, having used two lumbering paragraphs to do the work of 2½ little words ("I'm back!"), maybe it's time to dispense with the preamble-ese and move on, do you think??? And so...

...with steely determination, mouse buttons at the ready, they set off, this intrepid band―Spiffy Knickers and his stalwart companions―ready to blaze new trails into the deepest, darkest wilds of uncharted blogdom...

nick and nora:

i'll have what they're having

I was flipping through channels on TV recently, when it struck me how pathetic an exercise that is in this household. I mean, here I am, cable-lorn at present, and all that rabbit ears and a UHF loop can snag for me are a paltry six or seven stations. To make matters worse, on any given night, three of them come in so dismally that I'm never sure whether I'm watching, say, "Nightline," or "BeastMaster." (Hey, isn't Ted Koppel doing more club wielding and gravity-defying martial arts moves than usual tonight?)

You get the idea, I think: with so little to choose from, channel surfing at my place is about as satisfying as taking the car out for a spin―from one end of the driveway to the other, and back. Repeatedly.

Still, there is the occasional pleasant surprise. Take the other night, when I caught one of our PBS affiliates between pledge drives; to my delight, they were airing an old Thin Man movie. No, not "The Thin Man," actually, but one of the half dozen or so sequels, "Another Thin Man." Admittedly, the spawn do tend to be weaker, to varying degrees, than the original, though in this case it hardly matters. As film series go, aesthetically the Thin Man bunch falls somewhere between Satyajit Ray's Apu trilogy and Britain's relentless "Carry On" franchise, but as Ellen says, with William Powell and Myrna Loy, how can you lose?

And so, as the opening credits rolled, I dashed to the kitchen for the refreshments necessary to sustain me through 90-odd demanding minutes of urbane, banter-intensive sleuthing. I say demanding, because at that point I'd decided to resurrect an old pastime from days gone by: the infamous Thin Man drinking game.

Unlike other movie/TV drinking games involving sometimes-elaborate verbal or behavioral cues, this exercise is the very soul of simplicity. Nick hoists a glass; you down a drink. Nora hoists a glass; down the hatch again. No matter whether the camera catches them with glass to lips, or their glasses are held in momentary repose; each new glass on-screen is a trigger for the full consumption of one drink by the viewer. What could be easier?

Meanwhile, back in the kitchen―bad news. To lend the game an air of authenticity, in years past I leaned toward Nick's own libation of choice, the venerable Manhattan. These days, however, while I'm hardly a teetotaler, my imbibing seldom exceeds a bottle or two of beer, or maybe a glass of wine. No big surprise, then, when my kitchen cabinet yields neither vermouth nor rye―to say nothing of the required bitters. So, alas, no Manhattan this night. On the other hand, maybe that actually spells good news, given that the Heinekens I find in the fridge should make for less tipsy, more attentive movie viewing.

BTW, before anyone tries this little diversion at home, a friendly word of caution. Nick and Nora, as fans know, invariably work up a seemingly unquenchable thirst while solving mysteries. (Regrettably, when it came to flirting with dipsomania, William Powell was apparently no slouch in real life, either.) For us mere mortals, though, let discretion be the watchword. Lest you begin to slosh disconcertingly and a promising evening become thoroughly and ruinously besotted, you may find it wise to stick to tumblers of ginger ale. Or Ovaltine. Or Moxie...now available at a fine e-commerce establishment near you.

Whatever beverage you ultimately partake of, rest assured, the drill remains the same: simply adjust the picture and sound, settle in for the duration, and enjoy.* All set, then? Swell. Here's to genteel, well-lubricated crime fighting. Cheers!

*Lucky Strikes (filterless) optional, but strongly discouraged.

they're off and running!

Well, galumphing, anyway. The field of Democratic presidential aspirants, that is. It's hard to pare down my thoughts on the subject to a concise, relatively cogent few lines―but heck, since when have I let a little thing like that stop me? Not that you really give a fig what I think, of course, but I really do need to vent, if only briefly. And don't worry that you'll hurt my feelers if you decide to skip this part, OK? Guilt-free fast-forwarding: another complimentary service from the fine makers of A Boy & His Blog.

As you'll recall, I've periodically used these pages to invite readers to check out the John Kerry campaign. Kerry's stand on the issues, as outlined in his policy papers, is largely in synch with my own. Without question, I could happily give him my active support in '04. Moreover, I remain convinced that his would be the most formidable candidacy with which to take on this sitting President. Not only can Kerry be an articulate and persuasive speaker, but his status as Vietnam war hero helps inoculate him against the charge that Democrats are soft on defense, if not congenitally anti-military. Poll after poll points to that as a critical issue for any Democratic nominee, so Kerry's potential strength in that regard is not to be underestimated.

Unfortunately, the flip side of that very strength is that Kerry's compromised stance on Bush's war undercuts his credentials with many anti-war Dems. (On that score, I count myself among the disappointed.) In having sometimes appeared to be neither clearly for nor clearly against the war, Kerry effectively threw open the door for others.

Most dramatically, of course, it's Howard Dean who's used his early, firm opposition to the war as a springboard to land in the top tier of hopefuls. Despite his positions on gun control and capital punishment, I like Dean, and could actively support him as my party's nominee. On the plus side of the electablilty question, his relative social progressivism coupled with fiscal conservatism theoretically makes for broad appeal among both Democrats and moderate Republicans. On the negative side, he'd face an obvious uphill fight in addressing those unfounded but widespread concerns about Democrats' commitment to national security.

Among those now in serious contention, that leaves Dick Gephardt and Joe Lieberman. Gephardt, long an advocate of blue-collar Democratic core values, is in many ways the epitome of an "old-style" Democrat. The candidate most open to the spurious charge of being a "tax and spend liberal," he's also the least likely to shy away from identifying himself as a liberal. His health care plan for all Americans is bold and bracing, and he argues his case vigorously. That, in itself, is something worth cheering these days.

Less heartening is the unfortunate fact that Representative Gephardt, while personable and well-liked by colleagues, trails slightly behind Al Gore in the closely watched charisma sweepstakes. Needless to say, not an enviable place to be. (In all honesty, Americans would be well-advised to avoid Gephardt stump speeches while operating heavy machinery.) Still, such misgivings about style notwithstanding, I endorse the substance he embodies. He's another person I could quite happily work for in the crusade to unseat Dubya.

Personally, the keenest disappointment of the season to date has been Joe Lieberman. I don't question the Senator's integrity, nor is his intelligence remotely in doubt. The main problem―and for me, it's an insurmountable one―is that when he speaks, too often I hear a moderate Republican. This, put bluntly, is not a good thing.

Mind you, I quite understand the strategy, and the practical appeal, of positioning oneself as a centrist. In recent times, William Jefferson Clinton himself famously elevated centrist-style political opportunism to high art, cloaking it in the mantle of tactical "triangulation." But at least Clinton, at the end of the day, wound up confounding and infuriating conservatives more than liberals. With Lieberman, though, one wonders whether his notion of centrism isn't to claim the middle ground between the two poles of, say, Warren G. Harding, on the one hand, and Calvin Coolidge, on the other.

In any event, Lieberman's unapologetic embrace of Bush's invasion of Iraq, and his rejection of comprehensive health care initiatives as better left to the future, leave me totally turned off. I'm sorry, but what this nation sorely needs today is decisive, responsible, progressive leadership―not one more mealy-mouthed apologist for the status quo...no matter how inherently decent he/she is said to be.

And in the "no chide left behind" department...have I mentioned that I can't think of even a single compliment to bestow on North Carolina Senator John Edwards? "Lightweight" is the most benign adjective that comes to mind; they go rapidly downhill from there. Florida Senator Bob Graham, at least, is an experienced, respected, genial-enough nonentity (in national political terms), while Carol Moseley Braun is consistently withering in her criticism of the whole sorry list of Bush policies, foreign and domestic. Flaunting one of the more alarming Beltway coifs since Jim Traficant, plucky Dennis Kucinich has nonetheless battled back from that tonsorial liability to take his neo-populist/anti-war message farther than many thought possible. Even Al Sharpton, media-hound and gadfly demagogue that he is, manages to inject the campaign trail with a good bit of not wholly unwelcome comic relief. But as for the glib, blow-dried Edwards, his only discernable assets are a cheesy plastic smile (inexplicably believed by some to help render him boyishly telegenic) and torrents of his own cash. Please. If you don't mind, I'll stick with ipecac.

A campaign postscript. Can I tantalize any of you with the prospect of a "dream candidate" as an alternative to either Dubya or the challengers mentioned above? How about a progressive with the intellect of Bill Clinton (or surpassing it), but with the discipline, character, and sense of purpose that a smug, self-absorbed Clinton so clearly lacked? Someone with impeccable leadership credentials, a strong working knowledge of international affairs, and a peerless command of defense issues? An articulate, compelling communicator with an engaging media presence?

Yes? Well, then, may I direct your attention to the sidebar links to General Wesley Clark. Check out the bio, then read on to get a sense of his policy positions. Decide for yourself if my appraisal of a Clark candidacy isn't fair. Maybe I'm missing something, but everything I've seen suggests he has what it takes to appeal to Democrats, to a significant number of moderate Republicans, and to independents. We're talking critical mass here, folks.

Realistically, given Clark's relative lack of exposure, it's now late in the day for him to put together a serious run this time around. Still, if we're lucky and America is able to deny Dubya a second term, a Democrat in the Oval Office would be wise to consider Clark for a cabinet-level appointment; from there, he could be groomed for a run in the future. The man's already uncommonly imposing on paper, but add to that four or eight years' high-profile experience as Secretary of State, for example, and Clark becomes the strongest presidential candidate the Democratic Party has seen in ages.

Another scenario. Clark could be tapped in '04 as the Democratic nominee's running mate. While affording Clark neither the breadth nor the depth of Washington experience that a cabinet post could offer, serving as Vice-President would have the obvious value of introducing him to the American people. More significantly in the short term, however, Clark as running mate stops dead in its tracks any "soft on defense" rhetoric forthcoming from the Right in the campaign ahead. Such a strategy strikes me as more than sound, more than prudent. To reject it could well be self-destructive.

OK, I can see you're starting to get antsy, so I'll knock off playing pundit now. But a four-star general who just happens to be smart as a whip, media-friendly, and an unabashed liberal Democrat...well, you can't blame a guy for dreaming.

winding down now...

Before signing off for today, please indulge me while I take a moment to say howdy to Burt Scholtes, whom I owe a long-overdue email...and to Jessica Pecol, the driving force behind KCBloggers, with thanks for the repeated party invitations. A special thank you goes out to Leslie Katz, for checking in to see if I still sported a pulse, and for the kind words of encouragement. And yes, unlike Yours Truly's blog, her journal continues to flourish. But don't take my word for it. Scroll your way back up the page and click on the "leslie" link to see for yourself.

Joining the aforementioned (and other) denizens of my sidebar links―under the re-christened heading "guilt by association"―is Ginger Mayerson, a.k.a. Dr. Hackenbush. A recent "backward links" Google of A Boy & His Blog revealed a link from her site The Hackenblog; I hereby return the favor. You'll run into any number of interesting things to rummage through at The Hackenblog, from neo-noir hard-boiled composer fiction (as opposed to detective fiction), to mp3's of some of Ms. Mayerson's classical works. Visit. Enjoy.

tick-tock, my a**

"Arrgghhh!!!" mused the drooping, suddenly-sleepy blogsmith, staring in slack-jawed disbelief at the clock on the wall. "#*@~%!!!" he further reflected. Can it really be that late???

Yes, alas, it can. And so here it is, time already to bid you a fond farewell, although we've barely scratched the surface of things I had in mind to talk about. Movies, for instance; as in, Ellen recommends "Pirates of the Caribbean," while Judy gives a thumbs-up to "Seabiscuit," the new David McCullough vehicle. And me? I'm holding out for Bob Dylan's latest celluloid oddity, "Masked and Anonymous." Oh, well...maybe more from the world of cinema next time. Remind me, OK?

Now, though, this installment of AB&HB is history, I'm afraid. As ever, it's been grand sharing your company, and I look forward to our having another go at it in a month or two. Who knows―maybe sooner! ; )

Anyway, do take care, keep smiling, and best wishes. Till next time, then―ciao, y'all!

posted 11:57 P.M.

A Spiffy Knickers Aktiengesellschaft Production

In Association with Hayakawa's Tam-o'-Shanter Shack

Now Featuring the Cool New Summer Line of Panama Tams