Beware the Censored Wiki

Friends of the administration. Something terrible has come to my attention recently and I would be failing my duty of care to the public as Chief of Staff in the administration were I not to warn you all of the danger I've discovered. By now you would have noticed as you perused the Colbert '08 Memorial Notice Boards that Wikipedia has been placed On Notice. You see it seems this glorious collaborative wealth of knowledge is scarcely more than a sham. It is not, as I had believed in good faith, the source of all things factual. Evidently a team of Linux using, World of Warcraft playing, darkened room 'moderators' are censoring the 'encyclopedia' continuously, pushing their own agendas and turning the knife in the back of free speech with every keystroke.

Those of you who have been astute enough to source some information from sources other than Wikipedia will probably think I'm writing in response to the Donations-for-Edits scandal that has seen Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales' reputation shattered in recent weeks. Maybe you think I've got my back up in response to the donations rorting allegations made against the same St. Jimmy. Appalling as all of this is, and as much as I felt my trust in Wikipedia was betrayed, it is not a patch on the anger I can only imagine a loyal Australia's First President reader must have felt after a Wiki 'moderator' censored his or her informative edit to the Republicanism in Australia page recently.

This member of the AFP family noticed the aforementioned page failed to refer to the parallel Republic of Australia that has existed since our President took power way back in September 2006 - a significant omission. He/She dutifully edited the Wiki to make note of our great administration, in what can only be described as an unbiased, informative and most importantly factual paragraph. No sooner could this person take a screenshot of the page to forward to the AFP web team for archiving purposes, was the public's right to that knowledge violated by one of Wikipedia's army of censors.

Judge it for yourself, you can find the uncensored version of the page here, thankfully it was salvaged from amongst the thousands of emails Mr. President receives every day from the faithful. On behalf of the administration I'd like to sincerely thank the soldier of the truth who tried in vain to enlighten the world, whoever you may be. One day soon free speech will again be protected under the watchful eye of the Republic, in the meantime I implore you all to boycott Wikipedia, starve them of their ability to misappropriate funds, and to mislead the world. The truth is counting on you.

Hypocrisy

Our society loves nothing more than tearing down our tall poppies. Public life these days is increasingly literal - a life lived out in public - and synonymous with being placed constantly under the media’s glare. The press pack sweat on indiscretions from our most revered members and (rightfully to a point) airs them to a hungry audience. It’s got a gladiator, Colosseum feel to it sometimes, as we delight in the in the devouring of another contender.

Lately, politicians and their increasingly unbelievable sex scandals are in high rotation. It seems that a week can’t go by without another (formerly) well respected official getting brought down for immoral behaviour. Most times the frenzy is accentuated by a second highly combustible ingredient: hypocrisy. In 2006, US Congressman Mark Foley admitted soliciting sex from underage male Whitehouse Page’s – while chairing the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children (who sought to target sexual predators!) Similarly, Megapastor Ted Haggard – who took a hard line against homosexuality (and was by all reports a raving wacko), was poetically exposed for buying crystal meth from another man he paid to have regular sex with. In 2007, US Senator Larry Craig completed an unlikely trio, convicted of soliciting his stall-mate for sex in the bathroom of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport following 16 years of strict conservatism (and a voting record to match).

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer is the most recent to join the line of disgraced public officials, discovered employing the services of a $1000 an hour prostitute. Spitzer, likened to Eliot Ness, due to his campaign against impropriety in NY – and his alleged uncorruptability – fell hard and heavily from grace. My greatest disappointment though was not that Spitzer has a taste for expensive company (speculation is that he’s spent over $80,000 at the place, and I’m sure that’s the tip of the iceberg) – but that he dragged his devastated wife up on stage to share the spotlight during his apology. As you can see in the picture, she would’ve much rather been sitting down to a streaming hot bowl of razor blades…

I guess then, there are two issues here. First, have the common sense to stay out of trouble. Being a politician these days mean that all your skeletons, past, present and future will eventually be torn from the closet. Make the smart play and resist the temptation to abuse the power that comes with your office. Second, if you just can’t help yourself, have the courage to get on stage by yourself and take your lumps. The last thing anyone wants to see is your poor spouse ‘supporting’ you. It just makes us angrier.

While I’m here, I just want to send a warning out to my man Barrack. You’re our last hope that there can be a different kind of politician. The kind that isn’t secretly gay, while they rail against homosexuality or the kind that hunts down corruption, while lining their own pockets with cash. You're a clean cut, hope-peddling, family man. If by some twist of fate you end up plastered all over the press for not living up to the high standards you have set, then so help me, I will never trust another public figure again.

The Race Grinds On

Goddam Hillary. Like a punch drunk heavy-weight, she just doesn’t seem to know when to stay down. In the wash-up of yesterday’s voting in Ohio, Texas, Vermont and Rhode Island (America’s Tasmania – we’d both cut them free to drift away if we could), two things are clear: 1. Obama failed to land a knockout blow and 2. Hillary was unable to make much of a dent on the points deficit that has her definitively in 2^nd place. There are plenty of measures of who’s in front or behind, who has momentum and who is dead in the water – but it is delegate count that will be the ultimate determinant come August.

On offer in yesterday’s contest were some 370 delegates. According to Obama’s campaign manager David Plouffe, “Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and we gained 183. That's a net gain of 4 delegates”. Nice math Dave, thanks for spelling that out for me. While there is some give in these numbers, given that some are only ‘projected’ while counting continues, his point is salient: the Clintonista’s failed to eat away Obama’s pledged delegate lead. Plouffe, clearly the campaign mathlete, claims that Obama maintains a “lead of more than 150 [pledged] delegates, and there are only 611 pledged delegates left to win in the upcoming contests” (this discounts superdelegates for the time being – CNN has Obama’s total lead at 96). In short, yesterday’s ‘win’ for Hillary was important for momentum (that intangible campaign propellant) but did little to improve her actual position (Texas is a case in point, Hillary won the primary, but the delegates were divided 65-61 – while Obama currently leads the concurrent caucus in the same state).

So, where to from here? Next we’re off to Wyoming and Mississippi; relatively small states (in delegate terms), where Obama is expected to win comfortably. In fact, many are predicting that Hillary will head straight for the next big state, Pennsylvania, where 188 delegates are on offer. In other words, the race grinds on. The fighting within the Democratic Party continues – most recently about whether or not Michigan and Florida’s disqualified delegates should now be included (which would be blatant cheating) - while McCain is sitting pretty as the confirmed Republican nominee.

The Dem’s need to step back and take a breath. Another month or two of tearing each other apart will put both Obama and Hillary at a disadvantage come general election time. McCain is now free to attack both – while they’re concentrating on each other. Inconceivably, we run the risk of seeing another Republican in the White House next year, despite the best efforts of the current one to put that idea to bed. For me, the solution is simple. The mysterious superdelegates need to coalesce around Obama; he’s the voice of change, embodying our hope of better governance – and he’s the one that can beat McCain. In an experience-off, American’s will take the hard nosed Vietnam Vet over the former First Lady everyday of the week. For Dawkin’s sake, someone (I’m looking at you Howard Dean) throw in the towel for her before it’s too late.