Anyway hopefully a NZ TV station will show the series here at some stage, now it has been nominated for a staggering 23 Emmies. I reckon it will win many of them also.

I'm drunk. I'm lying in bed blogging with Rugby beside me. God I love my dog, he is pretty amazing.

Its funny - I was drinking cider tonight, and cider reminds me of London. I don't know - I drank a lot of cider in London - it was kind of a thing for a while. And London - doesn't remind me of the city - but it reminds me of Chris (Work Boy) and Martin and Juan and Philippe and Evan and Rob and stupid hot boy with abs and I don't know - it makes me feel a little homesick for London. I have said it before - I both loved and hated London. But London is all about the people. The city I loved and hated. The people i just loved. Well my favourite people I just loved. There were some others that I thought I loved, but London taught me that i really didn't.

Its so rare that I hear a song and fall in love with it immediately. Fireworks is so exactly that. I don't know why. But I've got it on repeat - and i'm lying here, just thinking about too many things.

Too many boys have been emailing me and I have so little time. So many boys have no idea what it takes to make a girl like them online. I'm attracted to intelligence and definitely not a large cock. I want somebody who is going to be extremely dirty and open in bed. But then I want someone I can wake up next to - and actually want to have a conversation with. And believe me - that is so hard to find.

I think I'm going to go out tomorrow and buy as much Obama stuff that I can find. I'm still so wholly pissed of at ex-date boy saying I can't have an opinion about US elections, because I can't vote. I hate to think how much tax I pay in this country (too bloody much). But more than most people I know. And I'm not saying that I think I should be able to vote - but I damn well can have an opinion. And lets face it - of course I do :)

I was talking about politics at lunch with my boss, who is a fairly heavy Republican. And he says he won't vote Democrat because they make him feel “evil” because, and I'm guessing, he earns a shite load of money. And I don't agree with that - I don't think that the rich are evil. I dont' think increasing taxes on people who have worked hard (a lot of them bloody hard) for what they earn is the answer. I think the rich support far too much of society. And as I've said - - most work bloody hard for their money, and deserve it. BUT - I could never vote Republican for issues other than financial.

Its so funny given how heavy a National supporter I am back home. I hate Helen Clark and pretty much everything that she stands for. And yet - I'm about as anti-Republican as I am anti-Labour - and sometimes I think that makes absolutely no sense. But politics in the U.S. is so bullshit sometimes. Issues that aren't or shouldn't be important, become very important come election time. And some of those are things that I feel so strongly about - I can't see past them. I'm not saying thats right - but its definitely how I feel. And I don't respect people who vote based on one issue - but I guess thats what I would do here, if I could vote.

But actually - dont' get me started, on how, even if I could vote- my vote wouldn't count for shite. Because in DC - its such a heavily Democratic “State” - that I don't believe anybody's vote really counts. And I dont' really understand how a few swing states - can have such a HUGE impact on who is elected over here.

Ooooh and I'm thinking about how much this post would piss off ex- date boy (except he now refuses to read the blog (other than forwarding it to some of his friends when I talked about how good our sex was) and I'm realising that I'm pretty drunk and probably should actually sleep. But instead - I'm sitting here typing this. And I really want a cigarette but I'm naked and thats so not going to happen. As getting dressed is so overrated.

All eyes are fixed on the Democratic National Convention - and some of our international bloggers are actually in Denver, Colorado, blogging it live. Others are wishing they were there and turning to their television screens and the Internet, to cover it as the news comes in.

Danish-Puerto Rican Solana Larsen, who is covering the event for Open Democracy, says the convention is “totally scripted.”

The Convention itself is totally scripted, and the predictability is partly what makes it more of a ceremony than a real political conversation. I met one of the speech writers, who says they have a team of writers who will be sitting behind the stage in “the pit” editing and writing politicians' submitted speeches before they go on stage. There are strict time limits they must adhere to, and they must submit their speeches in writing for editing first. I imagine it will be somewhat like the Oscar's except the people coming up to give the speeches won't be as drunk.

Despite this, Larsen is impressed with the inclusive nature of the event. She explains:

However, the Convention is making strong ‘gestures' towards democracy and inclusion of the American people, which is nice. Unfortunately it seems less a matter of principal, than something that seems good for publicity, given how Obama is currently on the up and up

She further adds:

I hope once I'm there, my faith in the US political process may be restored, but national politics here generally seem to be more about saying the right thing than doing it. With 5000 delegates and 15,000 members of the press, clearly this whole show is about publicity more than anything. There are so many gross imperfections in the political system that voters simply seem to have come to terms with and lost hope of changing. It's doesn't make it easier that those who could change it, stand to gain by allowing the status quo to persist.

In another post, Larsen says the convention is operating like a “big events company.”

At times it feels the Democratic Convention operates a little bit like a big events company. Witness for instance, the press release they sent out on August 14, announcing the fact that Coca-Cola has been “Named Official Recycling Provider of the 2008 Convention” and will even be donating some recycling bins, energy-efficient coolers, and hybrid electric trucks to the city of Denver.

Cynics will wonder whether Coca-Cola's eagerness to be involved in the greening of the Convention has anything to do with the fact that Obama will be accepting the official nomination at the Pepsi Center.

She concludes her post with much food for thought saying:

A platform for change for some, a money-making opportunity for others. American democracy seems boastful of the fact that it does both simultaneously.

Also from Puerto Rico, Vivirlatino is finally at the event, after initial teething problems with getting her credentials. Once there, she posts the following report:

I missed Hillary Clinton speaking at the Hispanic DNC Caucus because I was dealing with the nightmare that was the picking up of credentials. But our student correspondent, Estevan, was there so he'll be blogging his thoughts later.

I did arrive in time to see Howard Dean, who focused on the need to register Latinos and get them to vote. He also spoke of how the Republicans scapegoat Latinos and how McCain flip-flopped on his own immigration reform plan.

Loretta Sanchez, whom I had never heard speak and has a surprisingly squeaky voice, spoke of how Latinos have earned residency in the U.S. because of our losing blood in Iraq.

I was able to ask Sanchez if she knew about the ICE Raids in Mississippi. She said: “Yo no se nada de eso, señorita” without looking at me.

Yup, she called me girl.

Meanwhile, Crian Padayachee, who blogs at The Political Glimpse from Ireland, wishes he was there. Here's his take on the first half an hour of the convention:

Watching the convention so far, it seems like a pretty good time, I really wish I had bought a plane ticket to go down to Colorado. John Legend is singing as I type this, never liked the guy except for one song whose title leaves me at this moment. Hope you guys are following my Twitter updates, Senator Klobuchar from Minnesota was pretty impressive so far in her Obama speech. If you are watching CNN International for you convention coverage, all they are doing is talking and not focusing on the speakers.

Also click here to follow Padayachee's Twitterfeed.

From the UK, Neil Stockley says the convention will be an opportunity for Obama to show his true colours. He explains:

Leading Liberal Democrats heading to Denver, Colorado for the Democratic National Convention will be able to see how Barack Obama uses his personal story to present himself as the man of destiny, part of America’s unfolding history and, importantly, the man with a vision for America’s future.

And finally David Farrar from New Zealand reposts the “top 10 convention moments” from Real Clear Politics. They are:

1. 1932 DNC - FDR
2. 1964 RNC - Barry Goldwater
3. 1968 DNC - Chicago anti war riots
4. 1948 DNC - Hubert Humphrey in favour of racial integration, leading to Dixiecrats walkout
5. 1976 RNC - Ronald Reagan impromptu speech
6. 1980 DNC - Ted Kennedy speech
7. 1960 DNC - JFK acceptance speech
8. 2004 DNC - Barack Obama
9. 1992 RNC - Pat Buchanan with his culture war speech
10. 1896 DNC - William Jennings Bryan giving a rousing speech arguing against the gold standard

He further comments:

Interesting that most of them are not speechs by the winner, but by others. I suspect the Ted Kennedy speech at the 2008 DNC convention could become historic (and I say this not liking Kennedy). With Obama seen by many as an heir to JFK, a speech by the last surviving brother will have significance. And the reality that Ted Kennnedy is dying, this will be his last convention, and with his death will go that generation of the Kennedys. I suspect it will be very raw and powerful.

Stay tuned for more coverage from the convention.

A short video showing what Democratic VP nominee Joe Biden said earlier this year about Barack Obama and about John McCain. Nothing better than quoting someone back at themselves.

Hat Tip: New Zeal

1. 1932 DNC - FDR
2. 1964 RNC - Barry Goldwater
3. 1968 DNC - Chicago anti war riots
4. 1948 DNC - Hubert Humphrey in favour of racial integration, leading to Dixiecrats walkout
5. 1976 RNC - Ronald Reagan impromptu speech
6. 1980 DNC - Ted Kennedy speech
7. 1960 DNC - JFK acceptance speech
8. 2004 DNC - Barack Obama
9. 1992 RNC - Pat Buchanan with his culture war speech
10. 1896 DNC - William Jennings Bryan giving a rousing speech arguing against the gold standard

Interesting that most of them are not speechs by the winner, but by others. I suspect the Ted Kennedy speech at the 2008 DNC convention could become historic (and I say this not liking Kennedy). With Obama seen by many as an heir to JFK, a speech by the last surviving brother will have significance. And the reality that Ted Kennnedy is dying, this will be his last convention, and with his death will go that generation of the Kennedys. I suspect it will be very raw and powerful.

Biden is 65 years old and one of the more experiences Senators - especially in foreign policy. He sought the Democratic nomination 20 years ago in 1988 and was briefly a candidate this time also.

He entered the Senate when I was five years old - in 1973, so has served 36 years there. His age when elected, 30, is the constitutional minimum to be a Senator.

Unlike Obama (who was not in the Senate then), Biden voted in favour of the resolution authorising war in Iraq in 2002.

His 1988 presidental campaign was derailed by plagiarism scandals.

Often VP choices are made to balance the ticket - make it more electable. The Biden choice is of course also about electability, but more about negating fears of Obama’s inexperience that appealing to a specific demographic. It seems a pretty solid choice. The only downside is he undermines Obama’s brand as being about change, but I doubt it will seriously impact that.

The stark differences between the two came through the most on the question of whether there is evil in the world. Obama spoke of evil within America, “in parents who have viciously abused their children.” According to the Democrat, we can’t really erase evil in the world because “that is God’s task.” And we have to “have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil.”

For McCain, with a global war on terror raging, there was no equivocating: We must “defeat” evil. If al-Qaida’s placing of suicide vests on mentally-disabled women and then blowing them up by remote control in a Baghdad market isn’t evil, he asked: “You have to tell me what is.”

Fair point.

Asked to name figures he would rely on for advice, Obama gave the stock answer of family members. McCain pointed to Gen. David Petraeus, Iraq’s scourge of the surge; Democratic Rep. John Lewis, who “had his skull fractured” by white racists while protesting for civil rights in the 60s; plus Internet entrepreneur Meg Whitman, the innovative former CEO of eBay.

Bland answer No 2.

When Warren inquired into changes of mind on big issues, Obama fretted about welfare reform; McCain unashamedly said “drilling” — for reasons of national security and economic need.

Always a good question.

On taxes, Obama waxed political: “What I’m trying to do is create a sense of balance and fairness in our tax code.” McCain showed an understanding of what drives a free economy: “I don’t want to take any money from the rich. I want everybody to get rich. I don’t believe in class warfare or redistribution of the wealth.”

Again Obama gives a bland response.

To any honest observer, the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama have been evident all along. What we saw last weekend was Obama’s shallowness juxtaposed with McCain’s depth, the product of his extraordinary life experience.

The question is will Obama be able to go all the way to election day with bland generalisations about fairnness and change. Possibly he will.

Much more significantly is the electoral college count, and for the first time ever, McCain leads - by 274 votes to 264 for Obama. It is too close to call of course, but what is significant is the race is now becoming too close to call.

Obama will be picking his VP next week and ten have his convention. I suspect he will get a huge boost from the convention - especially as his address will be to 65,000 people in a stadium.

Then we get to hear McCain’s VP and his convention. He will then get a boost in turn. Around mid September the polls may start to give us some idea of how the final race is looking.

They have a useful myths page, including:

• Myth: America is not a truly free and open society
• Myth: Black Americans are held back in a country plagued by racism
• Myth: America refused any involvement in World War II, when the freedom of Europe was at stake, until the December 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbour forced her to participate
• Myth: America is exceptionally ungenerous in its aid to developing nations
• Myth: America is a violent, high-crime society

They also expose how ill-informed many people in the UK are on the US:

• 80% think the US sold Saddam Hussein more than a quarter of his weapons. In fact it was 0.46%
• 58% think polygamy is legal in some parts of the US
• 52% think the US more often sides with non-Muslims and non-Arabs in wars, when in reality “during the last half-century, in 11 of 12 major conflicts between Muslims and non-Muslims, Muslims and secular forces, or Arabs and non-Arabs, the United States has sided with the former group”

They also have a huge range of briefing papers on what the US has done for the world.

This is not a site saying America is perfect or that US Governments have not done some bad things. It is about adding some balance to the anti-Americanism out there, reflected in the poll results.

A few reporters admitted they knew of the candidate’s infidelities with a videographer long before John Edwards provided proof in a recent statement from Chapel Hill, North Carolina. In fact, the supermarket tabloid National Enquirer had been reporting the story for nearly a year. Now that it has proven true, at least some members of the mainstream media establishment are soul searching and shockedthat they sat on it for so long, especially when papers such as the New York Times reported on the alleged affairs of presumptive Republican nominee for President John McCain.

For reid (1053), a commentator at Kiwiblog, not reporting the story doesn’t prove the impotence of the mainstream press in the United States. Rather, holding “scandals” over candidates’ heads anoints the media as kingmakers.

The media have got enough to screw either McCain or Obama and it just depends which one those who control the agenda want to become POTUS. I said in Jan/Feb that the media will hold the dirt on Obama until about 4 weeks before the vote when it’s too late to do anything about it. (I imagine that homosexual trysts fueled by cocaine will be enough to prevent the first black candidate from being elected.)

At present that prediction still stands but as Adolf has pointed out on No Minister, Shillary hasn’t released her delegates and that’s an interesting wild card. Note though that there’s dirt on her too.

I find it amusing that some people really seem to think the US elections are free and open. They’re anything but.

One of the reasons the story stayed in the news — at least the supermarket press — is that Reille Hunter, the object of Edward’s affection, became pregnant out of wedlock. (Hunter gave birth to a daughter on February 27, 2008.) Edwards, once a Senator from North Carolina, said he is not the father of the child.

A minor debate in the blogosphere targets the fallen image of John Edwards, who was once seen as a charismatic politician who this election cycle helped push working-class poverty to a more prominent place in the political debate.

Shiloh Musings, a blog in Israel, writes:

I remember how upset people were when it was revealed that JFK (and the other men in the family) weren't loyal to their wives. It's so hard to keep one's illusions, to believe what we see. I feel sorry for the young.

Over at the Cuban-American blog babalú, there’s plenty of talk about two-faced Democrats, who have now gown through two major infidelity scandals in the past decade: “Good old liberals….every hair in place during TV speeches…But after 5:30 PM, some R&R.”

On the other hand, Egypt’s own Rantings of a Sandmonkey considers himself an Edwards fan, stating “ I like my politicians the way I like my lawyers- scummy, fake, manipulative and pretty.”

Sandmonkey, however, holds out no compassion for Elizabeth Edwards, who after the 2004 election, learned she had breast cancer.

But before you feel bad for his wife, please take a minute and chill. Don't think she is a victim. Ok, so she has cancer, that makes her a cancer victim, but come on, u get the idea. She knew of the affair in 2006, and still supported his running for office in 2008, knowing full well that if that thing exploded around general election time- and of lookie, it just did- the chances of the Dems winning the presidency would've been close to nill. But she went ahead anyway, aware of the affair, and keeping her mouth shut, defending him, appearing everywhere, using her cancer to guilt people into donating to their campaign and most recently to get herself a speaking gig at the convention- in order to get that coveted female terminal cancer victims whose husbands cheated on them demographic, it's soo important- and a Think Tank job. The woman's ambition and complicity puts Hillary's to shame, and now that Hillary knows that, she is probably glad that Elizabeth has cancer.