In today’s episode of “What the hell is wrong with people?,” Elizabeth Edwards, wife of former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, is facing harsh criticism for her silence about her husband’s recently admitted affair, which she found out about in 2006.

"I think she's complicit," said Brad Crone, a Raleigh-based Democratic consultant, CNN reports. "Obviously, she knew. While she's the victim, she clearly didn't stand in the way of the cover-up."

And that’s just the beginning. Elizabeth Edwards has a diary on the left-leaning Web site the Daily Kos, where she wrote the following on Aug. 8: “This was our private matter, and I frankly wanted it to be private because as painful as it was I did not want to have to play it out on a public stage as well.” While this may seem reasonable to you and me, it wasn’t reasonable for some of the posters who responded.

The assertion that Elizabeth Edwards has any responsibility in her husband’s public denial of this affair is absurd...“I wasn't the spouse who decided to support the cheater while he ran for the highest fucking office in the land while selfishly trying to hide this ticking time bomb,” wrote one poster. “I didn't knowingly accept people's hard earned money and precious time with this dirty skeleton in my closet. I didn't take the chance of destroying the Democratic Party's chance to retake the White House and repair the damage that has been done over the last 8 years.”

What …

“What she and John are now facing are the very harsh consequences of actions that they set in play themselves,” wrote another.

…the…

One more: “This diary is self-serving, Elizabeth. I'm upset at the ‘victim’ that you paint both John and yourself to be. You both lied and risked our winning in November because of your political ambitions.”

… hell?!?

The assertion that Elizabeth Edwards has any responsibility in her husband’s public denial of this affair is absurd, and the pronouncement that she deserves blame because the disclosure of said affair could have negative effects on the Democratic campaign is ludicrous. Elizabeth Edwards is a human being who has to make her own decisions when it comes to her personal life, no matter who her husband is. And if those decisions involve withholding personal information of this nature from the public, so be it.

...I don’t understand why John Edwards’ affair is a big deal in the first place.Also, I don’t understand why John Edwards’ affair is a big deal in the first place. It is high time everybody quit thinking that our politicians are gods among men. Time and time again, history has shown us that those in the positions of power can be the most corrupt individuals among us. When are we going to wake up and realize that the people we elect are just that: people? Sure, they may be smart, charming, experienced, reasonable – any of a multitude of admirable adjectives – but they’re going to screw up just as much as the rest of us. I want politicians that I can look up to just as much as anyone else, but I would never expect perfection from them.

Politicians make mistakes. Just because John Edwards had an affair doesn’t mean he’s a bad politician, and it doesn’t make him a bad leader. It makes him a human being who made a mistake. And what should Elizabeth Edwards have done when she found out about it?

She should have done whatever she damn-well pleased.
[CNN, Daily Kos]
Video after the jump...

"An Italian priest says he is organising the world's first beauty pageant for nuns..." -- BBC News

This is what I think it might look like, as told by two professional commentators covering the event: 

IKE:    This is Ike Onography—

DANTE:    And this is Dante Kitseriously, reporting live from the First Annual Miss Sister Beauty Pageant in Naples, Italy. Rosary cheeks and perky chastitties abound at the spiritual love-fest designed by Priest Antonio Rungi, eh, Ike?

IKE:    They sure do, Dante.

DANTE:    Now is it Rungi like “fungi” or Rungi like “bungee?”

IKE:    It’s neither, Dante. And here he comes. Father Rungi, you overcame much skepticism to make this pageant happen. How do you respond to accusations that the very idea of a beauty contest is irreligious?

"An Italian priest says he is organising the world's first beauty pageant for nuns"     -- BBC NewsFATHER RUNGI:    “Beauty is a gift from God. Do you really think nuns are all wizened, funereal old ladies? Today it’s not like that any more, thanks to an injection of youth and vitality brought to our country by foreign girls….The Brazilian girls above all.”

IKE:    Thank you, Father Rungi. So, what do you think, Dante, do Latina competitors have an advantage?

DANTE:    Oh yes, Ike, they just have naturally bigger…holiness…than the rest of the participants. Speaking of which, it looks like the pageant emcee is wearing the traditional bowtie and Pope hat, really getting into the Holy Spirit of things.

IKE:    Yes, that’s called a mitre, and it symbolizes sovereignty of Christ. Also, that man is a bishop. The Hallelujah chorus is dying down, and I believe the ceremony is about to begin.

ANNOUNCER:    “Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today...to get ready to rumbbbblllleee…!”

DANTE:    With pizzazz and humility, the contestants take the stage. And they’re quite beautiful, aren’t they?

IKE:    Indeed they are. You can tell quite a few are limping, obviously trying to score points with the judges by strapping their largest barbed cilices around their legs.

DANTE:    Nuns are now removing their cloth habits for the swimsuit competition. Don’t need to walk on water when you have one of those, eh, Ike? And you sure were right about those cilices…ouch!  By the by, someone should tell contestant number Six that inner beauty has an age limit. She gives a new meaning to “Holy Cow!”

Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today...to get ready to rumbbbblllleee…!IKE:    You clearly don’t understand what this event is about, Dante. The contestants are now crossing themselves in unison, but oh no! Contestant Two’s veil got caught on her prayer beads and was ripped off – she’ll definitely lose points from the modesty judge for that. Coming up next is the talent portion of the competition. While the contestants change back into their habits, what do you think Dante, any stand-outs?

DANTE:    It’s a close race, Ike. I was thinking of asking out contestant Seven or Fourteen, but there’s no telling if any of the judges feel the same. Priests are hard to read that way…

IKE:    Um, and here comes the talent show! What you see here are some of the more common routines: Knuckle-slapping marksmanship, Hail Mary speed trials, and Bible juggling. Though that interpretive dance by Four clearly misinterprets “all we like sheep.”

DANTE:    I’d say her first mistake was thinking the Church would let her interpret anything on her own. Meanwhile, contestant Eleven appears to just be standing still on stage. What’s she getting at, Ike?

IKE:    She’s trying to induce rapture. And oooh, her time ran out. That’s an automatic deduction. Better luck next millennium, Eleven.

[T]he pageant emcee is...really getting into the Holy Spirit of things.DANTE:    The stage is reset for the question and answer portion. Father Rungi is ready with the first question, and it’s “Why do bad things happen to good people?” Oh, it’s a stumper! Most contestants are struggling, but number Twelve has fallen down to her knees.

IKE:    Praying for the answer will definitely score her some points for poise.

DANTE:    Now the next question. It’s, “How would you describe your ideal date?” I tell ya, I’d sure like to know what Seven thinks. But contestant Nine is so embarrassed she has refused to answer. The judges are going to crucify her for that.

IKE:    That’s one inappropriate metaphor, Dante. “Tall, dark, and suffering” is the most common answer, though there were a few saints and popes thrown in there.

DANTE:    Trying to stand out like that will definitely not win them any points.

IKE:    I’m beginning to think you don’t know much about modern Catholicism, Dante. Here comes the final question; be sure to watch for a trick one.

Trying to stand out like that will definitely not win them any points.DANTE:    Right you are, Ike: “Could God make a rock so heavy He couldn’t lift it?” We have ten yeses and six nos, while at least three other contestants are having panic attacks.

IKE:    Some crises of faith are to be expected. They will pass – but oh no, contestant Eight is walking off stage, grabbing a science textbook from the pile of confiscated materials. I’m afraid her atheism will mean disqualification.

DANTE:    That’s the end of the competition. We’ll take a brief commercial break while the judges tally scores.

DANTE:    And we’re back! Dante Kitseriously here with Ike Onography. As the hour of judgment draweth near, the contestants have filed to the front of the stage. Mouths are moving in silent prayer as the envelope is handed to the announcer.

IKE:    Actually, Dante, it’s not an envelope but a six-hundred-year-old block of wood whose pattern closely resembles a number. It’s a sixteen! Contestant Sixteen is the winner by divine ordinance! And a Brazilian, too – Father Rungi must be happy about that. You can be sure this prophesy will be added to his sainthood file.

DANTE:    Well, that concludes the first annual Miss Sister Beauty Pageant. But have faith, it won’t be the last. And Father Rungi has even signed a deal with Fox to produce two television series, starting in fall 2010, pending our avoidance of a 2009 apocalypse. So be sure to keep watch for “Vatican Idol” and “Survivor: Inquisition.”

IKE:    This is Ike Onography and Dante Kitseriously. Thanks for watching, and stay holy.
[BBC News, Times Online]

Presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama chose the smartest guy in the room to be – possibly – the next vice president of the United States.

But that wasn’t necessarily the smartest decision he could make.

Before you get your vice president, Barry, you've got to become president first.

It’s been said, but it deserves repeating. Regardless of his chairmanship on the Senate Foreign Relations committee, three decades in the Senate and a wealth of foreign policy experience, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden doesn’t bring much to the Democratic ticket.

No excitement. No constituency. No electoral votes.

By choosing [Delaware Sen. Joe] Biden, one must conclude that [Barack] Obama really thinks he’s going to win.Understand, as the nominee, you’re not really choosing who you think would be the best president should anything happen to you, if you ever really became president. You’re choosing someone who will help you win – or at least, do you, or your candidacy, no harm.

Biden doesn’t do much for the former. And it’s arguable that he – or rather, his mouth – may be an albatross in regard to the latter, despite the foreign policy credentials he brings to the table.

Keep in mind, though, the key issue in this election is not going to be foreign policy. The Iraq War will wind down regardless of who is president. Despite Russia’s action in its old Soviet empire, most Americans still can’t find Georgia on a map – and they don’t care to. And, for the most part, Darfur is just a buzzword for those who want to feign an interest in Africa.

... [W]hy is [Barack] Obama playing defense on foreign policy in an economy-dominated election year? As the renowned – or the infamous, depending on your ideological bent – political strategist James Carville said during then presidential candidate Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign, “It’s the economy – stupid.”

This election will be about the economy, and there, Biden doesn’t help.

A late August Quinnipiac University poll confirmed what has been a truth of this campaign for months: The economy is the No. 1 issue for voters, Staten Island Today reports.

Knowing this, why is Obama playing defense on foreign policy in an economy-dominated election year?

By choosing Biden, one must conclude that Obama really thinks he’s going to win. (And that’s not meant as a pejorative.) Obama must really think he has this election in the bag, and so now, he surmises, it’s time to pick the best people for the job regardless of any political concerns.

It’s all good and well to promote the politics of change, but understand, the word “politics” is still a part of the mix.

Again, Biden is a smart pick. He just wasn’t a smart pick politically.
[SiLive.com]

Tonight’s Comedy Central Roast of Bob Saget could end up being one of the most foul-mouthed events television has ever seen, and given the conduct that has occurred at past roasts, that’s saying a lot. Comedians and actors including Cloris Leachman, Gilbert Gottfried and Norm Macdonald will roast the man perhaps most known for his role as Danny Tanner on the sitcom “Full House” (no word on whether the Olsen twins will attend). The roast, hosted by “Full House” alum John Stamos, should offer the kind of sadistic humor we’ve come to know and love from these roasts.

Stay tuned to this page as the roast goes on – updates to follow. During the commercials, check out the linked Comedy Central page where you can play the “Bob Saget’s Donkey Punchline” video game. Much like Carrot Top at the Comedy Central Roast of Flavor Flav, it’s fun for about a minute before it gets annoying.
[Comedy Central]

More after the jump... 

Barack Obama has not yet declared his running mate. As a result, an orgy of speculation has wrapped itself around the presumptive Democratic candidate like some eager trollop, which will twist and writhe until finally someone is announced and every news organization's hopes are dashed.

None will be pleased because no news source actually wants to know who the running mate will be. Some want to predict it, like the Washington Post reading into slated Democratic Convention speech schedules for hints. Others do not even care how absurd their "newsworthy" speculations are, like MSNBC's idea that the VP choice might be a Republican.  And the remaining news outlets do not even seem to care what the answer is, so long as they are the one to get it out of him; watch Tom Brokaw make every effort in spite of Obama's protestations.

Why does anyone need to know before Obama decides to announce it?Why does anyone need to know before Obama decides to announce it? It is his choice. A hundred news sources have all predicted potentials from among the same twenty options like slots on a roulette wheel. The ball has bounced around for the two months since Obama clinched his party’s nomination. But when it stops wherever the laws of the universe dictate, the "winners" are not "better" reporters any more than one person can have a "better" gambling addiction than another.

Random guessing is not reporting. Yes, randomness sometimes, coincidentally, seems to get it right – and for this reason, the Bible warns us to beware of false prophets.

Random guessing is not reporting.I am not suggesting that Obama will make his choice randomly – to the contrary: in roulette, the house always wins. I am suggesting that we will all find out Obama’s running mate at the same moment, when the only man with any power over this situation deems it time.

I understand that there is a 24-hour news cycle to fill, but it’s not called the speculative cycle or the drivel cycle. There will not be any news here until Obama deigns to make it. Can’t we just wait patiently and attentively?
[Washington Post, MSNBC, Meet the Press]
Video after the jump...

Correction: Due to an error by the BBC, TheSequitur.com incorrectly reported that Radiohead wrote the score for the upcoming film “Choke” in a Morning Coffee blog post published Wednesday, June 13, 2008. BBC now reports that Radiohead's management denies that the band is providing the score for "Choke" but confirms that its song "Reckoner" from the album "In Rainbows" will accompany the closing credits of the film. We regret the error.

When Chuck Palahniuk’s debut novel, “Fight Club,” was adapted for the big screen, The Dust Brothers’ soundtrack provided the film with an atmosphere of urgency and purpose that was perfect for the story. Now that a movie of the author’s fourth novel, “Choke” (2001), is set to hit theaters in September, the BBC reports that Radiohead will write the score.

When writing “Choke,” Palahniuk listened to the genre-bending band Radiohead for inspiration.

So what kind of story will Radiohead’s music accompany?"Clark Gregg [Choke director]... knew that I'd written Choke while listening to [Radiohead's 1993 debut album] ‘Pablo Honey,’ with ‘Creep’ over and over and over," BBC quotes Palahniuk as saying on the Shaun Keaveny Breakfast Show.

Gregg showed the band the film in hopes of convincing them to write the song for the last moments of the film and the credits. After viewing it, the band decided to not only write the final song, but the entire score, BBC reports.

So what kind of story will Radiohead’s music accompany?

...[A] sex-addicted con-man who pretends to choke at expensive restaurants...“Choke” follows the tale of a sex-addicted con-man who pretends to choke at expensive restaurants, allows fellow patrons to “save” him, enjoys their sympathies and reaps monetary awards for their efforts. It’s sick and twisted in the classic Palahniukian style, with characters and situations so unimaginable you are almost forced to believe they exist somewhere.

A good film score highlights and plays off of every element of the story it accompanies. The pulsing beats of The Dust Brothers’ soundtrack were able to bring the viewer into the fist-pounding underground world of “Fight Club.”

Radiohead, on the other hand, is working with a story that is at one turn depraved and calculating, at the other sentimental and wistful. Long story short: they have their work cut out for them.

And as a rabid Palahniuk fan who wants this movie to succeed on all fronts, I hope they’ll do a hell of a job.
[BBC, IMDB, Fox Searchlight]

A popular theory, which states that democratic nations do not wage war with one another, has recently come under attack – just like that Georgian separatist province of South Ossetia. These are not unrelated events.

The so-called “Democratic Peace Theory” stipulates that one democratic nation will not wage war against another one basically because they have much easier, cheaper and more effective ways of influencing each other. Also, democracies tend to be mostly capitalist and dependent on world markets, and the modern, interconnected world economy strongly discourages bad blood between trading partners. This economic point has even led to the "Capitalist Peace Theory," which, like most spin-offs, is less popular than the original.

Russia and Georgia are currently at war.The theory has been popular among academics ever since Immanuel Kant first theorized about it in his essay "Perpetual Peace." Mainstream news outlets such as the BBC also have covered this sexy yet wrongheaded approach (after all, how rarely is something is both sexy and smart?). And perhaps most famously it is a tenet of the Bush Doctrine: “...[D]emocracies don't go to war with each other,” the President has said. After all, it is a good idea to have a reason why one must spread democracy in the first place.

However, Democratic Peace Theory requires a very complicated and specific definition of a democratic nation. Periodic, free elections are not simply required – they must have been around for at least three years. Thus all wars for independence, such as the American Revolution, conveniently don’t count as wars between democracies. And proper democratic nations need to provide basic civil rights, which rules out those that allow slavery, or in other words pretty much every nation (and therefore every war) before the 1800s. And many conflicts don’t count because a "war" requires a minimum of 1,000 battle deaths.

In my mind, that puts the Democratic Peace Theory to bed.Russia and Georgia are currently at war. Both nations are technically liberal, capitalist democracies, and each has followed even the most stringent requirements for at least five years (since Russia’s 2000 election and Georgia’s 2003 Rose Revolution). It is too early to know exactly how many deaths have occurred in their ongoing conflict, but the Boston Globe reports that there may be as many as 2,000 dead so far.

In my mind, that puts the Democratic Peace Theory to bed. It also does not bode well for the Bush Doctrine. But I don’t think it is that big of a problem for the increasingly democratic world to deal with. Instead of relying on handy shorthands to keep them out of war and hoping their mere form of government will be sufficient safeguard, nations might just have to start affirmatively trying to avoid offensive war.  

I don’t think that’s a terrible burden, though nations seem to keep treating it as such.
[Kant’s "Perpetual Peace", BBC News, The White House, NY Times, Boston Globe]
Video after the jump...

“The Dark Knight” topped the weekend box office for the fourth consecutive week.

And Bloomberg News reports that the Batman sequel is now the third highest-grossing movie of all time – just behind “Star Wars” and “Titanic.”

“The Dark Knight” is just $20 million short of surpassing the $461 million “Star Wars.” The $601 million record set by 1997’s “Titanic” may be harder to capsize.

The credit to this phenomenal showing has to go to the late Heath Ledger, whose performance as Batman’s arch-nemesis “The Joker” has been critically acclaimed.

Image courtesy of TheDarkKnight.com.

But is Ledger’s depiction worthy of an Oscar nod?

Yes. No. And maybe.

Yes, Ledger’s performance far exceeds that of any comic book-based super villain, including Academy Award winner Jack Nicholson’s portrayal of the maniacal clown in Tim Burton’s 1989 “Batman.” Nicholson got a Golden Globe nomination for the role. Ledger’s Joker performance has near erased any memory of Nicholson’s and created an edgier, funnier, creepier villain.

Still, whether Ledger will get a posthumous Oscar nod will largely depend on who the other contenders are this year. Academy Award nominations don’t occur in a vacuum, and whether Ledger gets the nod will strictly depend on who’s he up against.

An Oscar nomination is great sendoff for a great actor like Ledger, who never won an Academy Award. But giving him the rare honor of a posthumous Oscar is going a little too far.

His depiction of The Joker was good but not that good.

Here is the rest of this weekend’s Top 10 list:
1.  "The Dark Knight"  $26M
2.  "Pineapple Express" $22.4M  
3.  "The Mummy"         $16.1M   
4.  "Sisterhood"        $10.8M   
5.  "Step Brothers"      $8.9M  
6.  "Mamma Mia!"         $8.1M   
7.  "Journey"            $4.9M   
8.  "Hancock"            $3.3M   
9.  "Swing Vote"         $3.1M   
10. "Wall-E"             $3M  
[Bloomberg.com, Wikipedia.com]