tripu

I must confess that two days ago I had no idea who George Carlin was.

I got to know him only yesterday, thanks to one of @ampajaro’s tweets announcing his death first thing in the morning. That was followed by a chain of entries coming from a few of the blogs I (helplessly try to) keep up with.

I have read such striking superlatives about this comedian that I youtubed him. After watching a few of his routines I now feel that I have to share and honour his talent. So here you have two pieces of different shows by George Carlin. Caution — strong opinions (and language) ahead.

The first video is basically about religion being a pile of bullshit (kudos, we need more of that nowadays):

The second video is a somewhat furious yet brilliant sermon against those who are against abortion. (I personally don’t agree with all of what Carlin says in this video. I am not against abortion. But unlike most of other left-wing people I know, I am not that sure that I am undoubtfully in favour of abortion, either. Also, I don’t buy the theory that equates abortion to women’s rights, and to “the choice of one woman”. In any case, I’m an atheist and my position has nothing to do with religion, tradition or customs, so I very much support — and enjoy — Carlin’s mockery of religion’s mean and simplistic approach to abortion):

What I admire the most about George Carlin is the technique — the round, perfectly-delivered script. He can speak for ten minutes without stumbling over a single syllable, without humming or hesitating. Weaving long enumerations of words or examples, putting the stress in the right place and stopping precisely where required.

And I love his strong and brave position on issues as sticky as religion, politics, taboos, gender, death, PC language and abortion. Even if at times he looks more like a fanatical preacher than a comedian and some of his arguments seem debatable to me. But hey, conservatism needs to be balanced. Don’t miss his “Seven dirty words” routine (“shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits”), which apparently caused a radio station to be sued and sparkled a major debate about censorship in the American airwaves. Here, the video audio in YouTube.

Si hubiese perdido una mañana en el consulado y pudiese votar por correo, votaría por Rajoy.

Y lo haría exclusivamente porque siento mucha simpatía por alguien que, como yo, se interesa por Japón, su cultura y su idioma.

Ayer, 3 de marzo, fue el Hinamatsuri (雛祭), el día dedicado a las niñas en Japón. Y esto obviamente Mariano lo sabía. Con qué gracia coló el guiño en su discurso final.

Hoy sabemos, sin lugar a dudas, que la niña de Rajoy es japonesa. Y solo por esto ya tendría mi voto.

ばんざいラホイ！

No we can’t. We can’t vote Obama. Not this side of the Atlantic. I like his approach. For what little I know, he seems a good candidate, and I would probably vote for him. If I could. I like politics, and I acknowledge the importance of American politics at a planetary scale. But to recite campaign slogans as if they were true is naïve. It is naïve in our own country, with our own politicians; but it is even more naïve when we are just a passive audience buying a distant show. Besides, they don’t care that much about us anyway.

You don’t wave flags because you know nationalities are coincidences, there is no pride in toponyms but geography and history. You don’t repeat toothpaste slogans because advertising slogans are void. Why then repeat slogans of political parties? You know they are designed by the same people who write slogans for toothpaste, and for very similar purposes. Believe in ideas, believe in policies, believe even in politicians.

I understand the excitement in Europe about Obama, but I think it’s a bit exaggerated. For three reasons. First, we can’t vote in November. Second, even if Obama wins there will be far less change in the USA than we would like to see. Third, blogging for Obama in Europe has an impact that is almost nil in the USA (remember how Europe voted for Kerry four years ago but its ballot sank somewhere in the Atlantic half-way to Washington).

Politics in Spain is dead boring. At least this is so when comparing with other countries.

I first realized this fact the year I lived in Italy. Italian politicians and parties are more diverse, brave and spontaneous than their Spanish counterparts. The ideological range is much wider, from the communists and radicals (Pannella, Bonino) to the nostalgic xenophobic neofascists (Bossi, Berlusconi). Not to mention the permanent inner fights in the leftish and Catholic parties (L’ulivo, La margherita, Prodi) and the fascinating tentacles of the Catholic Church. Many topics that in Spain are sort of taboo or understood ─civil war, gay rights, laicism vs. Catholicism, manipulation in the media─ are passionately discussed in Italy.

Now I find this George Galloway, a British MP that reminds me of Marco Pannella. Via my new flatmate I discovered this TV clip in which Galloway is interviewed in Sky News on the Lebanon vs. Israel crisis.

From Galloway’s very first answer it’s crystal clear that the interview is going to be anything but boring. This is a completely different point of view on international politics than the one the mainstream media show in their news. And Galloway puts forward his ideas in such a simple and passionate way that you can’t but feel empathic with him. (And pity the newsreader who interviews him).

I also found a rough transcript of the debate.

Stimulating at the least, definitely you don’t see these things in Spanish TV.