From the Christian Science Monitor's article on Maine's legalization of same-sex marriage, comes this gem by commenter Odumba:

We will see how these legislators do in their next election. Like prositutes, they have betrayed the people that they were supposed to represent. Judicial fiats are a tip of the iceberg for corruption. The people of Iowa will be heard from the next time they’re allowed to speak. The twelve on the DC assembly have just put themselves on guillotines, as political careers go.

...huh?

Recently, a wonderful show called Avatar: The Last Airbender ended its three year run on Nickelodeon. The show tells the story of the 12-year-old Avatar, the one person who can end the bloody 100-year war that has ravaged the world, as he struggles to learn the skills and powers necessary to defeat the Fire Lord before the summer. The show follows him and a few friends as they travel across their war-torn world.

This show breaks conventions of children's cartoons in many ways, but the most notable break from tradition came in the heavy influence of foreign culture. Nearly all of the Architecture seen throughout the Earth Kingdom and the Fire Nation is Eastern Asian, the Water Tribes are Inuit, and the Air Nomads are Tibetan. The kids eat with chopsticks, write in Chinese, wear clothes from various Asian and Inuit cultures. Aang is a monk who follows traditions heavily influenced by Tibetan Buddhism.

I have to say, I never minded that the show doesn't feature many white people (if any,) and given its popularity, it seems no one else did either. Which is why I am very offended that the lead rolls in the live-action movie have been cast with white actors. Not only that, but the casting calls specifically expressed a preference for white actors.

Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.

So let's see, the only way it will appeal to everyone is if the heroes of the show are white. Anything else, and the show will only appeal to a niche market? Those minorities can relate to white people's lives, but a white person cannot relate to a minority in a lead role?

Well, after literally minutes and minutes of research, I have determined the following facts:

1. I am white.
2. I loved the show in spite of this (though admittedly it took me a while to realize Aang was Tibetan)
3. The United States is 80% white and only 4.4% Asian.
4. The show was still the most popular animated series in its age demographic (under 14).

So what gives? According to Hyphen Magazine, Hollywood has a long history of "whitewashing" movies. I guess this shouldn't surprise me, but all the same, it still is pretty disgusting (John Wayne as Genghis Khan?) The thing that gets me is why they would do it for this movie, of all choices. The TV show never suffered for it's lack of white people, (apparently children don't care if their idol is a different race,) so why do we suddenly need to reestablish white folk as the heroes?

There has been audible outcry over Paramount's not-so-subtle racism in the casting decisions. Of course, instead of doing the right thing by apologizing and recasting the lead roles, they make two more mistakes. First, when the actor playing Zuko (Jesse McCartney) dropped out, they recast him with Dev Patel from Slumdog Millionaire). So now we have three white heroes and one brown villain. Which is not symbolic of anything whatsoever:

versus

Next they decide to cast minorities as the extras:

As much as we'd like to believe that they're actually casting 'authentic Asians' - as opposed to fake Asian? - in the movie, this recent Casting Call has only led us to realize one thing: Paramount Pictures intends to cast according to the races of the lead roles. Therefore:

• The Fire Nation (genocidal villains) will be brown/SE Asian.
• The Earth Nation (indecisive, saved by white heroes) will be East Asian
• The Air Nomads (peace-loving, oppressed saviour) will be Caucasian
• The Water Tribe (whitewashed, brave heroes) will be Caucasians

So now we have three white heroes liberating the helpless minorities from the dark-skinned villains. Hmm...

I have absolutely no interest in seeing this film when it comes out, despite my love of the series. Since it appears Paramount Pictures will not be changing their minds on this, the best thing people can do is to increase awareness of this issue, and hopefully there will be enough of a controversy that this film will suffer financially when it comes out. Maybe they might learn something.

For more information on this controversy, check out racebending.com, which discusses the controversy in much more detail than I can.

Also, on a more positive note, a guest poster at Shakesville has written a series of posts analyzing the series from a feminist perspective. Check them out: parts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

(Greg Nash/WDCPIX)

Well done, sir. Well done.

So the closeness of the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota was so close that it triggered an automatic recount under Minnesota law, meaning the various campaigns had an opportunity to look over the various ballots, looking for errors or invalidations that can be challenged. Minnesota Public Radio was kind enough to provide us with a sampling of challenged ballots. Some thoughts:

I know the campaigns are desperate, but it's rather embarrassing when the elections commission has to deal with really stupid challenges, like this one:

Ballot #9: The Eraser
The Franken campaign challenged this ballot. Even though the voter filled in the bubble next to Barkley's name, a Franken representative said what appear to be eraser marks over Franken's bubble indicated the voter intended to vote for Franken. (MPR Photo/Curtis Gilbert)

Who on earth indicates a choice by erasing it? Why is anybody spending any time on this? Same here:

Ballot #8: The Dot
The Coleman campaign challenged this ballot, arguing the voter didn't intend to vote for Franken, because of the small dot inside the bubble next to Dean Barkley’s name. (MPR Photo/Curtis Gilbert)

Ballot #5: Lizard People
This Beltrami County voter cast their ballot for Al Franken, but also put "Lizard People" as a write-in candidate, not only in the U.S. Senate race, but for several others. The county auditor/treasurer ruled that the vote should not be counted because it's considered an overvote. Representatives for Franken challenged that decision. (MPR Photo/Tom Robertson)

Heh. I think I originally voted to discount this ballot, and then changed my mind to give this to Al Franken. I guess my argument is that the voter didn't fill in the oval for write-in, so it should be counted as a vote for Franken, whereas they did fill it in above in the selection for presidency.

Sigh...

Making fun of cable news:

And of course:

So, last Monday, I wrote about how John McCain's spokesperson tried to use McCain time in Vietnam as a counterpoint for people pointing out that he had access to the secret forum questions before hand. Now, just four days later, Obama attacks McCain for having seven different houses. To counter that, McCain spokesman Brian Rogers use the same POW argument:

[Rogers] also added: "This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years -- in prison," referring to the prisoner of war camp that McCain was in during the Vietnam War.

Rogers called the house story "by far the most personal attack" of the campaign, and said "it comes from a candidate who said he was against this kind of thing."

Umm...what?

Anywho, I like Trapper John's response over at Daily Kos:

Lord. McCain is Giuliani-like at this point in his single-minded determination to cling to the one positive association that his campaign retains in the public mind. You have to wonder how'd he'd react to other, hypothetical scandals:

McCain Accused Of Taking Bribes From Abramoff: "This is a guy who didn't touch hard currency for five and a half years -- in prison," spokesman Brian Rogers told the Washington Post.

2003 McCain Arrest for DWI Uncovered: "This is a guy who didn't have a sip of booze for five and a half years -- in prison," spokesman Brian Rogers told the Washington Post.

McCain Caught Cheating With 22 Year-Old ASU Intern: "This is a guy who didn't get laid at all for five and a half years -- in prison," spokesman Brian Rogers told the Washington Post.

So, a few days ago, Obama and McCain participated in a forum with Evangelical preacher Rick Warren, to test them on issues that the Evangelical voting bloc will focus on. Sen. Obama went first, while Sen. McCain was supposedly kept in a "Cone of Silence" to keep him from having time to prepare for an almost identical round of questions. Now it comes to light that McCain had not been in the building at the time, and therefore could theoretically overheard the questions on the radio. Of course, the McCain campaign denies this, and frankly I don't really care either way, but one comment by a McCain spokeswoman caught my attention:

Nicolle Wallace, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain, said on Sunday night that Mr. McCain had not heard the broadcast of the event while in his motorcade and heard none of the questions.

“The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,” Ms. Wallace said.

Now, I certainly don't envy McCain for the crap he had to endure in Vietnam, and I respect his decision to refuse an early release. But I not quite seeing how being tortured in Vietnam would make anyone more or less honest. Sure it might make some people reevaluate their lives for the better, but it'll make just as many people turn inward and become angered and resentful, as apparently occured with Sen. McCain in the years following his return.

I am concerned about the increasing willingness to treat criticism of the military as unacceptable. About a month ago, Gen. Wesley Clark drew the ire of the McCain campaign when he discussed McCain's foreign policy experience^[PDF] on CBS's Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer: (emphasis mine)

Gen. CLARK: ...[H]e hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, 'I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it publicly?'

[...]

SCHIEFFER: I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean...

Gen. CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.

SCHIEFFER: Really?

The response from the McCain campaign?

In a statement released by the McCain campaign Sunday afternoon, retired Admiral Leighton "Snuffy" Smith criticized Clark's comment.

"If Barack Obama wants to question John McCain's service to his country, he should have the guts to do it himself and not hide behind his campaign surrogates," Smith said.

"If he expects the American people to believe his pledges about a new kind of politics, Barack Obama has a responsibility to condemn these attacks."

What attacks? All Clark did was to point out that suffering from a war does not make you an expert in the field of foreign policy, yet as has happened with Ms. Wallace, this got blown way out of proportion, and McCain surrogates both put up an "argument" with served as more of a distraction that a real counterpoint.

Personally I hope Obama doesn't handle any controversy by apologizing like he did with the Clark affair, where he denounced the former generals comments. He really need to start standing up to absurd controversies like this if he wants to earn any respect at all. One can only hope.

I have been wanting to say something about this for some time now, but it wasn't until I read this post at Feministing that I decided to add my two cents to the mix. The show has already aired, but it feels good to have this out.

What triggered me was this ad for a particular episode of "Reality Bites Back," a showed designed to parody typical reality shows:

This really irritated me by perpetuating the stereotype of the fat, fowl-mouthed, black women. This is not portrayed positively, of course, the "humor" in it is based off of how disgusting an experience this would be, as evidenced by one man's comment: "I'm obviously nervous about turning Luenell on because A: it's what I have to do, and B: it sounds really [expletive] scary." She is solely focused on her sexual appetite, which of course is also portrayed as shocking and weird.

I suspect that they consider this parody of how stupid typical reality game shows are, but it's like the New Yorker cartoon featuring Barack and Michelle Obama as terrorists. Both could have found a way to mock without offending someone else.

My favorite TV show is currently The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, so I don't want to completely write Comedy Central off, but lately I am seeing a lot more of this type of trash appearing. They have a new show called The Gong Show, which seems to parody America's Got Talent type shows in the same way, with the host making all sorts of cracks, because hey, he's just joking.

Next week, Reality Bites Back is airing the episode "Almost-American Gladiators," which Wikipedia describes as: "A series of immigration-themed physical challenges are presented to the contestants." I can hardly wait.

Back in 1993, somebody decided to make a movie based on Super Mario Bros. Just watch the first 62 seconds of the film to get an idea the quality of the film. It then quickly deteriorates.