Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman is running for governor of California.

Given her launch, this is not a bid I think she’ll win.

First of all, I have doubts about any campaign that would allow the photograph above to be taken. I’m not sure which tortured saint she is affecting to emulate, but much as the shrinking GOP base purports to love their narrow slice of religion, they’re not so much into the suffering.  They want an action Christ to kick out the heathens and idolators and sodomites. The image above suggests someone who might, finally, be brought to say, “Please… just… don’t.” Whitman and her advisors have forgotten that the current governator was elected because he was a murderous rampaging robot. (And he then campaigned by smashing windshields with a sledgehammer. You just can’t make these things up.)

Secondly, if this piece in the LA Times is any indication, I honestly have no idea what the hell she’s talking about. And I’ve been listening to people run for office all my life, so this is saying something. She praises the governorship of Pete Wilson, but not his support of the anti-immigration initiative Proposition 187, or his having raised taxes to balance the state budget. Whatever one may think of them, these two items are the signal accomplishments of the Wilson governorship. Praising Wilson’s stewardship but not these policies is like saying that George W. Bush did a great job, except for that Iraq war, the botched Afghanistan war, the economic wipeout, the gulag in Guantanamo, the attorney general scandal, the disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina, the do-nothing run-up to September 11th, and at least a few more things. It’s like saying, “The roses on the East Lawn were nicely tended.”

The thrust of Whitman’s platform, which simultaneously seeks to be anti-gay and pro-gay, anti-immigrant and pro-immigrant, anti-environment and pro-environment, is this:   “I think maybe it is about time for a governor who has created jobs, who’s managed a budget, who’s led and inspired large organizations, who listens well, and who can drive an agenda.” This is the pro-forma rationale that seemingly “moderate” Republicans, of which Mitt Romney was only the most recent example, trot out to justify their candidacies. And I would ask:  Can they name a role model, a successful major business leader, who proved to be a success at high office?

By way of example, here’s the generally accepted list of greatest U.S. presidents:

• George Washington, a soldier and farmer
• Abraham Lincoln, a lawyer
• Franklin D. Roosevelt, a lawyer
• Thomas Jefferson, a lawyer
• Theodore Roosevelt, a writer
• James Madison, a lawyer
• Andrew Jackson, a lawyer and soldier
• Woodrow Wilson, an educator
• Harry S. Truman, a businessman
• Dwight D. Eisenhower, a soldier

Judging by this list, if the country were in dire straits, I’d look around for a really good lawyer to fix it. Maybe they know things about compromise, and structuring deals, and getting warring parties to work together. (And, indeed, that’s just what we did recently.) It should also be noted that the lone businessman on this list above failed at that business, and then got a political position — which is where he started to actually succeed in life. It also shouldn’t go without saying that we recently had our first MBA “president.” His name:  George W. Bush.

Who are recognized as the best governors California has had, people who actually presided over the state when it worked?

• Hiram Johnson, a lawyer
• Earl Warren, a lawyer
• Pat Brown, a lawyer

And before entering politics, what was Pete Wilson’s career?

He was a lawyer.

Given this history, and the lack of evidence that big business experience ever translates into good public governance, I don’t think Meg Whitman’s gubernatorial bid is a Buy It Now.

So what happens when you’re on your way to Lake Arrowhead (elevation: 5191 feet) and a blizzard leaves snow at 3,000 feet and up and forces a shutdown of all the roads?

You wind up staying in the Fairfield Inn & Suites in San Bernardino. Which in an earlier time would’ve been called:  a truckstop.

You’ve probably already seen this, but I love the taste of this so much I had to post it.

Ben & Jerry created “Yes Pecan!” ice cream flavor for Obama. They then asked people for suggestions of an ice cream named for: George W. Bush.

Here are some of  the responses:

– Grape Depression

– Abu Grape

– Nut’n Accomplished

– Iraqi Road

– Chock ‘n Awe

– WireTapioca

– Impeach Cobbler

– Guantanmallow

– imPeachmint

– Neocon Politan

– RockyRoad to Fascism

– The Reese’s-cession

– Cookie D’oh!

– The Housing Crunch

– Nougalar Proliferation

– Credit Crunch

– Country Pumpkin

– Chunky Monkey in Chief

– WM Delicious

– Chocolate Chimp

– Caramel Preemptive Stripe

This Saturday, I’m seeing the outre band Sparks with two good friends. They’ll be playing the entirety of the “classic” album “Kimono My House” as well as their new release, “Exotic Creatures of the Deep.” (And here’s what my wife thinks of that one.)

This video comes from their last album and tour, and gives you a strong sense of their live show and of the videos that accompany that show.

I’ve gotten a lot of emails, Facebook messages, and even one very upset text message from friends apoplectic over the loss of Indie 103.1, which I wrote about here. I’ve been suffering the loss of great radio stations my whole life; what makes this different is that Indie 103.1 may indeed prove to have been the last great independent terrestrial radio station, one where deejays could be tastemakers because they played what they chose. I think this model is now officially dead. Micromarkets serve narrow slices of listenership — on satellite radio, on internet radio — and that’s when there’s a listenership at all. In the age of the iPod, who cares what somebody else wants you to hear?

Much of the music played on Indie 103.1 already exists in my CD rack or stored on a computer, and what I don’t have I can get. The one thing that Indie 103.1 had that is irreplaceable is Jonesy’s Jukebox, a daily dose of iconoclasm from Sex Pistols guitarist Steve Jones. Jones would play music — or not — or play his own version of songs on acoustic guitar — or talk shop with unforgettable guests — or, well, whistle for a really long time. While I miss the notion of Indie 103.1, I miss Jonesy personally.

Here’s what he’s been up to in the three weeks since the station went off the air:  playing lots of Call of Duty, and looking for a new radio gig. I truly wish him luck on the latter. In the meantime, I guess I’ll catch up on past episodes of Jonesy’s Jukebox.

And to think that some people scoffed.

In honor of The Mark Twain Prize honoring my father tonight, Wednesday Feb. 4 at 9PM on PBS, AND more importantly to point out the fact that the 7 Words You Can’t Say on Television are still deemed indecent almost 40 years later and will be bleeped in said special tonight – I am sending you the 7 WORDS that you will be missing tonight, and ask that you pass them on to 7 PEOPLE today.

This chain letter will not bring untold riches or dreams coming true.
It might make some people laugh, and it might make others cry.
It could possibly get you in trouble (depending on who you send it to).
But most probably, it will just remind people of my dad, who was funny and a great teacher, and a way cool father.
Oh, yeah, and the hypocrisy of language that still exists.

So here they are:
Shit
Piss
Fuck
Cunt
Cocksucker
Motherfucker
Tits.

Enjoy. Keep the Chain alive. Have a great day.
And watch the show. It is wonderful.

love,
Kelly Carlin-McCall

What would my daughter rather be doing right now? Playing miniature golf. At least, that’s her request every weekend:  “Can we go miniature golfing?” We’ve done this often. Many, many, many times. She hasn’t tired of it yet, but her brothers don’t want to go any more and I’ve been looking for a new course.

Luckily, I found one.  And it’s much closer to home.

If I owned Microsoft stock, I’d strongly consider selling. Like, right now.

This isn’t because of any great fears about the stock market in general. Lately, I’ve been buying a little stock. And it isn’t because of my long-standing ambivalence toward Microsoft, which stems from my background as an Apple user since 1982.

No, I would sell Microsoft because I think the Third Wave 2.0 is about ready to wash over it.

(In his 1980 book “The Third Wave,” Alvin Toffler posited that the First Wave was the settled agricultural society that replaced hunter-gatherer cultures; the Second Wave was the industrial age society; and the Third Wave was the post-industrial, or information-based, society. I think we’ve already seen a lot of that — and now we’re in the first shakeout, or Third Wave 2.0.)

Problems come in threes, goes the saying. Here are Microsoft’s:

1. For the first time, sales of Windows are down. This is at the same time that world demand for “netbooks” is going to skyrocket. What are netbooks? They’re small, cheap, portable computers that retail for about $300. These are the machines that will get outer Mongolia online, and the projected adoption rate is staggering. How easily will Microsoft be able to sell an installation of Windows onto these machines for $100, when the machine itself costs only $300? Not easily. Especially when Linux is free.
2. Microsoft was famously late in recognizing the possibilities of the Internet. Google owns the search-engine business that could have been Microsoft’s, and the Yahoo deal didn’t happen. Now Gmail is going to eat Outlook’s lunch. If Google controls the search business, and Firefox rules the browser world, and Google (again) takes over email, what’s left online for Microsoft?
3. Problem #3:  pessimism. Yes, I have heard the rumor that the economy is bad. But do I think it’s going to permanently “reset” at a lower level? That’s what Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer thinks. Really? Even with continued population growth, and new economies coming online all over the world, it’s going to be smaller? Or is it just that Microsoft won’t be able to adapt to new realities? “Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier,” Colin Powell famously said. (And no, I don’t think he was prescribing a Candide-like naivete.) The opposite is certainly true:  pessimism is draining. I suppose such sourness is understandable, coming on the heels of Vista’s grand kerplunk, and those bad commercials with Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Gates buying shoes. But still.

I don’t know what Microsoft is going to do from here on out, except lose market share. (Especially to Google.)

By the way, I would sell Apple stock, too, if I still had any. Not because I think they’re falling behind or screwing up. I’d sell because the performance of the stock market relies  upon perception, and whether or not it’s true, the perception is that Steve Jobs is Apple. That’s the downside of running a personality cult:  There’s trouble when the personality proves to be all too mortal.

Bloomberg gives a good overview of the cuts at the LA Times — and the ever-shifting management lineup of recent years.

Which only served to remind me that I had forgotten to indict Tribune Company in all this. My mistake. Consider them blamed as well.

The LA Weekly’s Jill Stewart adds this:

We’ve heard back from several top journalists at the Los Angeles Times, who are still in shock over the stunningly bad news that, amidst more layoffs, the California Section, previously known as Metro, will be wiped out and tucked somewhere in the A Section of the recession-whacked newspaper.

This is a big deal, the news quickly appearing in Variety and dozens of other sites. One of the journos I respect the most in Los Angeles, Times reporter and education expert Howard Blume, who is also a former editor and writer at LA Weekly, had this to say in an email to me a short time ago:

“I don’t really know how this is going to work. The discussions have taken place well above my pay grade. There will still be a newspaper, and some of us will still be working here. And those folks will still do their darndest to put out a quality, relevant newspaper. And the rest of us will be looking for alternative employment. This is Journalism 2009.”

As we continue to follow the decline of the Los Angeles Times, remember: It didn’t have to be like this. They can blame new tech for rendering their quaint ways obsolete — but greed and mismanagement left them unprepared for the tides of change.