Q: The lady or the paper tiger? (or: Is Karl Rove rooting for Hillary Clinton?)

Rove: "Pay no attention to the viable candidate on the right"...?

A: At first, the idea presented in this L.A. Times piece from yesterday seems crazy: Clinton may be a target of Rove's reverse psychology. But is it so crazy, it just might work have already worked?

In the run-up to the 2004 Democratic National Convention, when it was not yet clear who George W. Bush's opponent would be that November, Rove and his aides had begun to fear that their most dangerous foe would be then-Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

With his Southern base, charismatic style and populist message, Edwards, they believed, could be a real threat to Bush's reelection.

But instead of attacking Edwards, Rove's team opened fire at John Kerry.

Their thinking went like this, Dowd explained: Democrats, in a knee-jerk reaction to GOP attacks, would rally around Kerry, whom Rove considered a comparatively weak opponent, and make him the party's nominee. Thus Bush would be spared from confronting Edwards, the candidate Republican strategists actually feared most.

Rove has plenty of reasons to prefer Clinton to Barack Obama. Even if Clinton beats whatever dope the GOP nominates, she'll still be a divisive figure her political opponents can marginalize, just as they did when she was First Lady. She's not going to be the Democrats' Ronald Reagan. Obama could change things significantly -- both in terms of pushing through policy and shifting rhetoric -- in ways Hillary can't and won't.

Everyone should be voting Obama. Have I mentioned this?

Q: How does the Bush administration define loyalty?

A: The Voice reports on some of the criteria employed by Karl Rove and the Bush White House in choosing, and weeding out, U.S. Attorneys.

Of course, as with candidates for any W.-appointed gig, inexperience is forgivable so long as you're "loyal." But loyalty, as defined by Alberto Gonzales and Team Dubya, isn't just a matter of being Republican or targeting Dems; it's also a willingness to implement administration dogma into the justice system, with a shoehorn if necessary.

Drink the Kool Aid, man: Karl Rove's Just-Us Department

For Roslynn Mauskopf, one of New York's two U.S. Attorneys, keeping the White House's love has been pretty simple. Like they say in Sin City, sometimes standing up for your friends means killing a whole lot of people.

While Mauskopf did not score well on the gun, immigration, and public corruption standards that the DOJ claims it uses to evaluate prosecutors, she was at the top of the charts by a standard the department has not acknowledged that it employs: enthusiasm for the death penalty. Her office has sought the death penalty against at least 16 defendants...The judge in one of those cases called the decision to seek the death penalty "absurd," just as another judge declared in a 2004 case that he was "deeply troubled" by the government's death penalty application.

The attorney general, not Mauskopf, makes the final decision in death penalty cases, acting on the recommendation of the U.S. Attorney. But Mauskopf's aggressive support of the Bush efforts to "federalize the death penalty" has helped make New York one of the three states with the most cases. The use of these cases as a DOJ measure of U.S. Attorney performance became clear in a department e-mail that derided one of the dismissed U.S. Attorneys for expressing "differences of opinion about when to seek the death penalty." The Los Angeles Times reported that three of the fired eight disagreed with Justice on capital cases.

Mauskopf's hard-on for tax-sponsored executions isn't lost on the White House, and her loyalty is already paying dividends: She's currently a nominee for federal judge — a lifetime appointment. Bush and Rove may be out of the White House soon, but unfortunately for the justice system, their heckova-jobisms will linger for decades.

Q: Is "300" worth its weight in baklava?

300: It's like Zorba but with harder abs.

A: T.A.M.S.Y. saw 300 Sunday night, and to be perfectly honestopolous, it was not much better than just fine. The battle scenes might be worth the price of admission on their own (true to Spartan tradition, Snyder takes great pleasure in the big fat Greek bloodletting), but overall, the flick takes itself way, way, way, way too seriously.

It's a spartan story in every sense of the word. And despite the crushing heaviness and the many sternly delivered speeches, I'm still not clear of what the film's POV was meant to be, aside from being (a) accidentally pro-troop surge¹ and (b) unabashedly pro-Sparta.

Subtract the eye-popping visuals, and you're left with a lot of draggy yammering — mostly alpha males sounding off furiously, signifying nothing.

GRANTED: We Greeks do take ourselves too seriously sometimes, and we're a big fan of the dramatic, unannounced gestures, particularly if we're on our seventh ouzo. But behind all the drama and the epic poetry and the nationalism and the carousing and the fatal pride, the Greeks love a good joke. Or at least a few smashed plates.

The filmic Sin City, behind the direction of Robert Rodriguez, was carried by its gallows humor: Death was its joie de vivre, and immorality its POV. Snyder does well in translating the Miller-esque visual brilliance of Sin City to ancient times, but he fails to find a suitably epic substitute for Robert Rodriguez's sociopathic glee.

Delphi hot: One sexy piece of oracle.

The flashes of levity in 300 are few + far between (even counting the running gag about how awesome it is to give your life for Sparta, which is about as hilarious as Jim Lehrer). But the flashes of real gravity are even fewer and far betweener.

HOMER SAYS WHAT? The problem at the heart of 300 is that it confuses epic-ness with self-assurance. It celebrates King Leonidas' pride as fatal, but refuses even to consider that it might be a flaw. Anyone who dares question the logic of waging war is either a traitorous pussy or a corpse waiting to happen (usually both).

As the ancient Greeks will tell you, loving war doesn't mean never having to say you're sorry. Snyder and Miller seem to have ignored that what makes a violent epic epic is the reflective eye at the center of the storm, the traitorous pussy voice inside every hero that pauses to ask What does it all mean? Here and there, even Achilles felt like a heel.

---

IT'S ALL GAELIC TO ME: I did enjoy 300's characterization of the Greeks as civilization's breadbasket of awesomeness — but why were the Greeks themselves all played by dirty fooking micks?

Seriously, the Greeks haven't been so badly screwed over by the Irish since Frank Costello framed poor Jimmy Pappas.

DISCUSS AMONGST YOURSELVES: I'm pretty sure that the crowd pictured in the film's final shot would have required more people than were actually alive on Earth in 500 B.C.

---

ELSEWHERE: Film blog Solace in Cinema compares shots from 300 the film to Miller's original illustrations from 300 the graphic novel. Very cool.

Juice is like wine: Kid Leonidas, hungry like the wolf.

EARLIER: Why do filmgoers so love the Greeks?

---

¹ It's funny, by which I mean strange, that the film's to troop surge or not to troop surge suplot so closely mirrors current Congressional debate. I haven't read one of Frank Miller's hotheaded soapboxes in nearly a decade, but based on everything I know of the man from my fanboy days, I'm certain he must despise George W. Bush with every fiber of his being. Miller's favorite topic is freedom of speech, and protecting our freedom's is not exactly W.'s strong point.

So it's even funnier, by which I mean stranger, that 300 aims to glorify democracy and freedom through violently stifling debate. Do Snyder and Miller realize they're trying to make an epic hero out of Karl Rove?

Q: Why is Montana so fricking slow with the counting?

A: It's hard to stay focused when Karl Rove keeps calling in bomb threats.


No, but seriously, Montana, your state has like 12 people. Let's get a move on here. For Christ sakes.

WaPo: Democratic Hopes Rest on Two Races

Q: Is T.A.M.S.Y. prepared to call the Senate race?

A: Yes. The media's not going to declare it 'til dawn, at the earliest, but the T.A.M.S.Y. spidey sense is never wrong.

Book it, bank it, bronze it, put it in your pipe and smoke it: Democrats win. Tyranny loses. History is made. Karl Rove cries. Sunshine, lollipops and rainbows. You heard it here first.