The Last Post on the Bugle

My fellow blogger and dear friend SLH, had this to say in a recent post: “Can we all please stop using 9/11 as a measuring stick whenever an earthquake or an epidemic kills more than 3000 people.” My answer to that is no, we cannot, my dear SLH.
SLH further: “If Such a concept held any substance the people who apply it would realize that numerically 9/11 was not so appalling.”
You, my friend SLH, just aren’t familiar with the necessary equations. The numbers were, by international standards, extremely appalling. It’s what I call 9/11 maths. Here’s how it works:

Using the recent hurricane in Bangladesh as an example, I will judge the severity of their troubles with my 9/11 measuring stick.
American GDP per capita: 43,500 – Bangladeshi GDP per capita: 1,700
43,500 divided by 1700 = USA has roughly 25 times the GDP per capita of Bangladesh

So, 9/11: 3,000 dead
Bangladesh 4000 dead
3,000 times 25 = 75,000 Banglas
So, if 75,000 Banglas die in an unprovoked attack, they can call that their 9/11.
Conversely: 4000 / 25 = 160
If 160 Americans die in an unprovoked attack, it’s our Bangladeshi hurricane.

I wish I liked Hugo Chavez. The idea of an independent South American state, nationalizing it’s resources, emerging from under the yoke of American influence, appeals to me profoundly. But Hugo Chavez doesn’t, he is just to annoying.

My problem with Chavez isn’t necessarily that he is undemocratic. I think it is important to note the innate hypocrisy of American criticisms to that effect, when
actions by the US government directly contributed to the near collapse of Venezuela’s fledgling democracy in 2002. In April of that year, a coup intended to oust Chavez, removed the democratically elected leader from power for 48 hours. The new government under businessman Pedro Carmona, was immediately endorsed by the United States. Not surprising, in light of the fact that the White House had supported and helped orchestrate the whole thing.(http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,688071,00.html)

That is why, when Chavez shuts down opposition television stations, or suggests an overhaul to his country’s Constitution that could allow him to remain in power indefinitely, I don’t think of him primarily as a dictator or despot. Moreover, I think of him as an overambitious entertainer, a man who has repressed his own flaws, who can’t face the fact that he is hopelessly untalented. This reminds me of my good friend EDB’s concept of “Evil of Banality.” Chavez isn’t necessarily ideologically driven to undermining his country’s democracy and paralyzing free speech (evil), he just wants more people to tune in to his show (pure and utter banality).

The same EDB recently articulated my own hopes for the region, “I just hope that the less demagogic lefties in South America outshine him,” she wrote. It would also be nice to see less repetitive, more original leaders emerge. I just can’t hear any more “Bush = el diablo” speeches. There is, after all, a more sophisticated argument to be made. Chavez’s thoughtless propaganda in no way benefits his people, all it does is serve his desire to demonstrate his endless balls. His daily display of buffoonery, does more harm than good to what is otherwise an entirely legitimate cause. It is in this spirit of vanity and pomposity, that Chavez isolates himself from decent, intelligent, liberal world leaders such as Zapatero, who might otherwise be entirely sympathetic to a country like Venezuela’s struggles.
The King of Spain was right to shut the man up.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/19/video-king-of-spain-tell_n_73318.html

Only a year after his somewhat unfortunate attempt to harass the, admittedly quite saucy, German chancellor Angela Merkel, Dubya yesterday continued his worldwide campaign of sexual intimidation. In a press conference, Bush fondly recalled his conquest of Pakistan’s “Boy of Destiny” Perverz Musharraf, “my message was that we believe strongly in elections, and that you ought to have elections soon, and…you need to take off your uniform.” This conjures up images worth repressing.

Surprisingly enough, many GOP leaders have echoed Bush’s call for the disrobing of the plump Pakistani. GOP candidate Tom Tancredo, sensing hypocracy, took it a step further and advocated asking Mubarak, Karzai and King Al-Saud to take off their uniforms. According to sources close to the campaign, if elected president, Tancredo would, in his first week as president, invite these leaders to the white house, strip them of their uniforms and force them to form a human pyramid (Mubarak, after all, knows his pyramids…). Bush could then bring in his dog “Spot”, and take some pictures, while Tancredo bombs Mecca and Medina. Abu Great!

Will this appeal to the base? I think so.