Of Facebook groups, babies, and elections

I try to avoid video links here, but I really can't help but post this one. You've most likely all seen it before, probably multiple times.



It's funny, and sad, because it's so scarily accurate. Which gets me thinking about a Facebook group I recently came across (and joined), 'I have more Foreign Policy Experience than Sarah Palin', which as of today has 171 thousand members. In fact, it occurs to me that my 5-month old daughter has more foreign policy experience than Sarah Palin. Yes, it's true. She's been to one foreign country, and will be touring 2 more in the next few weeks. She's bicultural, and exposed regularly to two different languages. And, in the various groups that she attends, she interacts with babies from many different countries, and is equally at ease with all of them. Add to that her 'tell it like it is' approach to problem solving, and why shouldn't she be considered for Vice President?

So, I suppose this means that I'm really not a Republican?

The reason I've borrowed a television

I should feel traitorous for saying this, as my loyalties should be with my chosen team, Portugal. In my defense, I do also like several other teams, and gladly root for them (except of course when they're playing against Portugal). In this tournament, my chosen alternates are Holland and Spain (not in this tournament, I root for England, and it's odd to not have them playing here). Oh, and I also have teams I enjoy rooting against. In this tournament, Germany and Italy (not in this tournament, Argentina and the US).

But after that game, I really really want Holland to win it all. Even more than the Portugal over Spain final I dreamt of in the last post. I can't help it...Holland just play such lovely football. Does that make me a bad person? A bad fan? By the way, these may or may not be rhetorical questions.

We interrupt this blog for a Euro 2008 delusion

Two games down, 28 more to go before Portugal can defeat Spain in the Euro 2008 final game.

Yes both teams mentioned in this delusion are known as much for their chronic underachieving as for anything else. But a girl can dream, can't she?

Happy Human Day

Just to show that I occasionally still have brain cells to think about the world at large, a post about Earth Day. I approve of Earth Day, I encourage all to participate in it in any and all inventive and imaginative ways. But after a day spent in part thinking about the significance of it, my one recurring thought is a memory of a Lauren Becker essay (delivered as the introduction to a Point of Inquiry podcast from around Earth Day 2006) on the real meaning behind the yearly event. Her point is that none of this is about saving the Earth because, let's fact it, the Earth was here long before we were and will certainly outsurvive us. What we're really trying to preserve is ourselves, who are as a species far more vulnerable.

This really resonates with me. Not least because everything on this planet is interconnected. Because our actions towards the environment, the Earth and everything on it, do affect our future. But also because humans as a species are self-centered survivalists, just as we should be. Is this cynicism? Realism? I have no idea.

What are your thoughts on this day? Have you done, or will you do anything particular to commemorate it? What do you do throughout the year to help save the humans?

*Photo credit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Earth_flag_PD.jpg*

'When there is no more room in hell the dead shall roam the bars.'

I am not normally a big zombie-film watcher. I don't usually participate in events where I would be expected to dress up. I am enormously pregnant, and could give birth at any moment. So, of course I must do this. Actually, because I am enormously pregnant, I must do this. Because, let's face it, what could be cooler than a highly-pregnant zombie?

Would anyone like to join me?

*Photo credit: http://current.com/items/88863566_scandal_intrigue_on_capitol_hill_pregnant_moms_drugs_baby_zombie_uprising*

Me, and all the others who aren't going to work tomorrow

I am now officially on maternity leave. It's a strange feeling, and will only feel stranger as the days go on. And I'm not the only one who isn't going to work tomorrow. Actually, enormous numbers of day-care workers, nurses, and, most importantly for me, midwives, will also be on a leave of sorts. Which is to say, on strike.

It's been a question that keeps coming up, about what I will do if I go into labor during the strike, so it seems logical to write about it here. Of course, there's no guarantee that the strike will still be on when my daughter decides to make her grand entrance into the world, as there's no knowing how long the strike will last. In the past, I've heard, such actions have been ended after hours by parliament passing a law ordering the striking workers to go back to work. But there seems to be a sense that this will not be what happens this time, though I suppose we'll all find out for sure tomorrow.

The strange thing is, that although a strike has been rumored and talked about and now planned for a while, we can't seem to find out all the things we'd like to know about what this all actually means for me. I know that I can forget about the tour of the maternity ward which I had hoped to go on this week, and that my midwife appointment for next week is cancelled if the strike is still on (which I assume it will be). Any emergencies or urgent questions, there is a hotline set up, or I suppose I could make an appointment with my regular family doctor. I know that, or at least I assume (I haven't heard anything one way or the other) that I can go to the hospital when I'm in labor, and have my child there. Everything else is conjecture, and assumes that all hospitals will follow roughly the same procedures.

I must confess, I think everything will turn out o.k. The one issue might be the length of stay after the birth. The one hospital in the greater Copenhagen area which has issued what seems to be a full statement (or fuller than the one my hospital has on its website anyway) indicates that (of course barring complications) women having their babies there will be sent home four hours after giving birth. Some women would probably want this anyway, but many women choose to take advantage of the opportunity to stay for two nights, with their partner and of course the baby rooming in. I'd like to do this, too, and it will be very disappointing if I have to go home so soon. Not the end of the world, but not the way I'd like to do things. Though it seems logical; medical supervision for birth is an essential service, giving new parents a chance to get to know their babies before taking them home clearly isn't.

So, in short, what else can I say? I sympathize with the striking workers. I'd prefer they carried out their strike in, oh, June? But of course that has everything to do with me, and nothing to do with them.

Time to turn off the lights

This was first brought to my attention a month ago, and amazingly enough, I was actually reminded of it today. It will be interesting to see if enough turn off their lights tonight, from 8 til 9, to make a difference for anyone looking out the window. I suspect that in my little suburb, we'll be alone in having a candle-lit apartment. But I hope I'm wrong. You can find out more at http://www.earthhour.org/.

I only have a small handful of you who actually read this blog, but are any of you doing this? I'd appreciate knowing how it went in your area. The buzz in my household is a recent newspaper article, the idea of which is that the candles everyone will be using will give off more CO2 than that saved by not using electric lights, but I'm going for the symbolism of the relative darkness anyway, and will hold firm that we'll try it out here.

Politics

No really, politics. It suddenly hit me today, that it's Super Tuesday, and I've let myself become distracted from the most exciting primary season that I can remember. Alas, it's not practical to stay awake until 5am when the California polls close*. But how exciting it will be to have some results waiting for me when I awake.

*Yes, the California polls. Because this is the only one that really counts. Which means nothing, except that I am clearly a Californian. Oh, and photo credit, http://www.theliberaloc.com/2008/02/03/breaking-field-poll-shows-huge-gains-by-obama-in-ca/.

I should go to bed, but...

...I am really curious to hear the final results in New Hampshire. I can't remember ever being this interested in a presidential election, especially this early on in the proceedings. In honor of the occasion, I found two of the most fun political items in my limited archive of old photos...taken from a giant 'no more war in Iraq' rally in London, my then home, in 2003. I'm especially proud of the tea one. And with that, I will try to force myself to go to bed, knowing that the results will be waiting patiently for me when I awaken.

More election pondering

There's a lot of this election signage going around, outside of train stations, on fences and railings, across bridges. I find it fascinating, to follow the vibe of the election, what the parties are saying, and might be thinking.

I track how the passers-by have clearly interacted with the signs. Right-wing party candidates are far more likely to have their signs vandalized, I've noticed. Defacing the right-wing, anti-immigration Danish People's Party's placards and posters is actually somewhat of an art form, which I will eventually have my camera with me to photograph examples of. Actually, I could create a post just to talk about all the ways in which this party and its values are distasteful. And probably will.

I enjoy how the far left and far right tend to wrap around and meet each other on the other side. For example, the Danish People's Party and far-left Enhedslisten united in their rejection of the European Union.

I savor the headlines after debates between the two candidates for prime-minister, extolling all the errors and possible errors which each candidate made. The tabloids make it very clear, 'Fogh lied!', 'Thorning-Schmidt lied!' Eventually, I hope to make time to watch the debates myself, but for now, the spin is so much more fun.

I find out what the nine major parties are about, and then pontificate about them. Will Asmaa Abdol-Hamid's candidacy split Enhedslisten? Who will the New Alliance party give support to? Why did Helle Thorning-Schmidt ever think she could make an alliance with the Conservative Party?

In short, this election is exciting and interesting to me. It would all be so much more meaningful though, if I had the right to vote.

Two unscientific ways to call the upcoming elections

This post is about the upcoming Danish parliamentary elections (which are on the 13th). I'm entranced by how elections in Europe seem to spring up out of nowhere, whenever the ruling regime feels they are in a good position to keep their mandate. Yes, I know it is actually somewhat predictable, and follows its own logic, but to me, used to knowing when elections will be years, decades, centuries in advance, it always seems more than a bit random, this idea of calling for a vote whenever you feel like it, like some sort of nation-wide dinner party, only without food.

The shortness of the preparation time makes for very intense dynamics: in this instance, there was officially just under three weeks notice before the election date (though of course there are always rumors well beforehand, so it can't have been a total surprise to anyone), which means that Denmark is now in the midst of a 3-week obsessive media frenzy, which will last presumably until the election itself (when there will be equally obsessive spin regarding all aspects of the voting, who's in, who's out, who is working with whom, that kind of thing).

This time, I feel I have some basic idea of the different parties, where they generally stand on the issues (and which issues are important at the moment), some of the key characters, and so I'm really trying to pay attention. At this point, I can honestly say that I have no idea what will untimately happen (though I'd put my money on the current government staying in power, possibly with some change in support parties). However, I have found two prognosticating tools, which I would like to share with you.

1) Use Facebook. There are currently two groups which are relevant here, one attempting to find 100,000 voters who want to get rid of (current prime minister, and head of the middle-right wing Liberal Party) Anders Fogh Rasmussen, and another attempting to find 100,001 voters that do not want Helle Thorning-Schmidt (the head of the main opposition party, the middle-left Social Democrats) to be prime minister. At this point, the 'get rid of Fogh' party has 15,310 members. The 'we don't want Thorning-Schmidt to win' group has only 1,680. Clearly, this shows that either Fogh is in deep trouble, or that stereotypical college-age Facebook users are not representative of the general population.

2) Opinion polls. According to today's edition of free morning paper Urban, of all the 8 main party leaders, voters would most like to have Anders Fogh as their accountant or bank advisor. They would also rather buy a used car from him than from Helle Thorning-Schmidt (though interestingly the party leader they would most trust to sell them a used car is left-wing Socialist People's Party leader Villy Søvndal). But before you feel too sorry for Helle, consider that she is the one that voters would most like to hug. Especially the male voters (Thorning-Schmidt is a very elegant willowy blonde, which might explain this), but also the female voters (she and Villy Søvndal are tied for second behind centrist party New Alliance leader Nasser Khader, who is not horrible looking). Men would also choose to dance with Helle at a party, though women are more likely to dance with Villy or Nasser, or, if they aren't available, then maybe with Anders Fogh. So, what does this bode for the candidates? If the warm fuzzy candidate has an edge, then it might be time for a new government. If it's all about sound financial advice and overall sales, then I'd say that Anders Fogh has timed the election well.

This is not to dismiss other ways of predicting, from tea leaves to more serious polls (which I believe show Anders Fogh ahead, but with Thorning-Schmidt catching up fast). Can you add any techniques to my list? And for the American elections, which candidate would you most like to hug? Or buy a used car from?

*Grafitti in the hip, working-class Nørrebro area of Copenhagen, taken months ago, well before the election. This person clearly does not like Fogh. According to my preconceived notions, the sprayer of this sidewalk statement would vote for a very left-wing party, like maybe Enhedslisten.*

Yet another brush with fame

And by brush with fame, I mean learning that there was a famous person in the same city as I was. Don't be fooled into thinking that I actually talked with, saw, or in any other way came into direct contact with anyone famous.

Anyway, apparently Bill Clinton is back in town, and during his trip, before the visit to the prime minister, he decided to wow the townspeople by signing a few of his books. Keep in mind that Denmark is fairly besotted with Clinton as it is, and the feeling seems to be mutual...I have the idea that Copenhagen is home to a speech by or visit from the former president at least once a year, though this is just anecdotal, I don't keep official track. So, Bill in a bookstore is a sure winner.

You can see a photo of the chosen bookstore here. Note the signs on the side of the store exclaiming that you can 'Meet President Bill Clinton'. This seems to be making a statement about something, though whether in favor of Clinton, or against the favor of the actual president, is hard to say (I'd say it's a strong mix of both).

According to the article, the line to get in to meet the president was 'long, very long'. I didn't see any line when I passed by on my walk to class (it was maybe a bit early), but there were guards at the door...actually, that's what clued me in that something was up, though my thoughts were more 'Arnold Busck is closed, and there are police guards at the door...has there been a horrible crime committed?' I also passed by some increased police action in front of parliament, presumably in preparation for the big visit(or).

It all got me thinking. And my main thought was, it must be strange to be Clinton. Everywhere you go, you're surrounded by bodyguards. You can't just go somewhere, the area has to be vetted for security for days beforehand. People line up to see you, and want you to sign books for them. You get to see the world, but never in a natural way, just seeing how people really live their everyday lives. Can you ever have just a bad day? Do you always have to be warm, friendly, and approachable? (It seems that Clinton doesn't have a problem with this last one...here he is in the store...the headline reads 'Clinton charmed Copenhageners'). Is it possible to maintain strong ties to reality with a lifestyle like that? Of course, the reverse is that you can have way more impact on the world than just about anyone. You can raise awareness of a location by just showing up, or of an issue by just discussing it.

But is it worth it? Would you give up a normal life for that kind of influence? I'm pretty sure I wouldn't, though that's easy for me to say as I'm pretty confident that I won't have the chance in any case. If you had the opportunity, and took it, what would you do with the newfound power? What would you speak about? Where would you go?

Unusual sex symbols

I'm sure I first saw it on one of your blogs. It's the 'celebrity affair list'. You know, it's where you think of famous people whom you are extremely unlikely to meet in your real life, and with whom, if you do meet them, and if they should happen to want to throw themselves at you, and offer you a night of unbridled passion, you could accept without it counting as an affair, because, well, they're on your list. I think there was supposed to be a set number only, like 5, I can't remember exactly. This came up at a Halloween party with a number of my school colleagues (actually I brought it up after having discussed it with Thor at a different event the night before). This generated list after list of members of the opposite sex, the same sex, dead people revived for the list, people whom we would not want on our list as they are now, but as they had been at some time in their past, and of course, anti-lists.

There were some common threads, of course. The number one person for the ladies (though he was on a couple of anti-lists as well) was George Clooney. Johnny Depp was also popular. There weren't as many men participating, so there were no women on more than one man's list. I seemed to be the only one, man or woman, with Angelina Jolie on my list, for some reason.

But, for all the people who made lists, all the people on our lists were actors. I suppose it makes sense. We think of the people who are marketed and known for their powers of attraction. When pressed, some of us could think of athletes (Ms. Mood, please don't laugh, but Rui Costa...definitely on my list). But that was the extent of our candidate pool. No captains of industry, no scientists, no academics, no intellectuals...I really wanted intellectuals for my list, but couldn't think of any. And no world leaders or other politicians. They may be charismatic, but not in a bedroom kind of way.

But, then I saw this from yesterday's front page of the free morning newspaper Metro x-Press...a picture of departing American secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld, and the caption 'Goodbye to the older person's sex symbol'. And it makes me wonder. Donald Rumsfeld, sex symbol? Really? I know I have been living away from home for a long time...but really? The accompanying article said something about 'Rums-stud'...really? Politics aside, he's not a bad looking guy, especially for someone in his 70's, but he's not on my list at least. Is he on yours? Or would he be on the list of anyone you know?

And, while we're talking about it, who's on your list? Thor and I both had great difficulties generating lots of names for ours. Thor did instantly name Salma Hayek, which makes me very proud that I have a boyfriend with such good taste in women (I'd probably have to put her on my list too). I instantly named Adrien Brody. After that it was tough. Except for Angelina, of course. So, what about you...who is on your list? Extra bonus points if you can come up with any sexy intellectuals whom I can steal for my list.

Lisboa: Cow Town

A veritable stampede, and right in the middle of Praça dos Restauradores!

A distant relative of Portugal defender Ricardo Cowvalho.

Some Portuguese cowlture: A traditional green and black taxi.

A cowpyrighted cow outside of Cowmpo Pequeno.

Cowmpo Pequeno, home of Lisboetan bullfighting, and of the cowpyrighted cow.

Portuguese epic poet Luís Vaz de Cowmões.

More Portugese cowlture: Portugese tiles with egg on top. Portuguese food is often topped with a fried egg. Well, the meat dishes at least.

I have been told that this cow looks just like Christopher Cowlumbus.

A cow of the world, located inside Cowlombo shopping center.

A view of Cowlombo.

A statue of Armenian industrialist Cowlouste Gulbenkian, located on the grounds of the Fundação Cowlouste Gulbenkian. Not a cow in sight, but just too good a pun to pass up.

Obligatory VM Post: Where I show a lack of knowledge and a surplus of opinions

Just some thoughts on the running thread in my life at the moment, VM...Verdens Mesterskab, better known in English speaking places as the World Cup.

Part of the cover story in today's Metro Xpress (one of two free morning papers) on Portugal's victory yesterday over Angola (inexpertly translated by me): Portugal have been named among the favorites to win the Cup. Yesterday the Southern Europeans also won their first match in the tournament 1-0 over Angola, but without maintaining a same high level of play throughout the 90 minutes. Pauleta scored the only goal of the match with assistance from the 33-year old Figo, who at times played as if he was young again.

My first question, and I don't ask this sarcastically, I really want to know, is: when is a player seen as so old that, when he plays well, it's like returning to youth? Figo has been past that point for a while, as far as I can tell. After all, isn't Pauleta also 33? Yet I never hear him being referred to in those ageist terms. Is it just that Figo has been in the public eye for longer and so seems somehow older?

My second question, and I'm not being sarcastic here, either, much: why is a lackluster, but winning, first game in the qualifying rounds so bad? Would it be better if Portugal had ripped Angola to shreds, but were as a result much more tired, so that they ended up losing a later game because of that? Would the fans be happier? I have the same question about the England-Paraguay game. Isn't it better to save the sexy action football for the knockout rounds where it counts?

And, in the interests of journalistic fairness, the other free morning paper, Urban, today had an interesting look at why women like football, from a columnist named Marie Østerbye (translation also mine, also inexpert): What is there not to like? Truly well-conditioned men, drama, sweat, exciting tricks with a ball, and not least, mean who show FEELINGS.... Here are men who writhe in pain. Who celebrate their happiness or scream with rage. And who will sometimes even CRY. Yes, there you have it. A rationalization for diving. Is it to get your opponent a yellow card? No, it's to pull chicks.

Tillykke til Mary og Frederik!

Well, Thor's morning ritual of looking at the on-line headlines gave us the news that the wait is over. Crown Princess Mary and Crown Prince Frederik have now jointly produced their first child, thus ensuring the further continuation of the world's oldest direct monarchy. I have no reason to be excited about this, but find it exciting anyway, which is good as it will be the main topic of conversation pretty much everywhere in the country for an interminable amount of time (if the buzz which occurred before, during and after their wedding last year can be anything to go by).

The main birth-related event right now is Frederik's first meeting with the press after the birth. The article refers to Frederick as 'den nybagte far' or literally 'the newly baked father', 'nybagt' being the normal way of referring to newborns in Danish. Mary and baby haven't emerged from their room at Rigshospitalet yet. It is also of course just possible that the couple have given birth to an invisible baby, as shown by the picture of Frederik, which is clearly the photo of the moment so far. Frederik said also that 'the baby is sleeping soundly and has no idea what awaits him'. A press frenzy, no doubt.

You can also see an English version of the press meeting here and a good overview of Mary's transition from Australian businesswoman to Danish royal is given here.

Two baby related issues are:

The name: Apart from the current Queen Margarethe, the last 20 or so Danish Kings have been named (in order), Christian, Frederik, Christian, Frederik, Christian, Frederik...do you sense any pattern? No one doubts that the new one will be named Christian, though wouldn't it be great if they chose something else? Probably by this point, the whole royal family is afraid of jinxing the monarchy if they don't stick to the historical order (though the earlier kings had cool names, too, like Harald, Valdemar, and Gorm - well, methinks they can do without a Prince Gorm actually). As for the rest of the little guy's names, no one seems to know, except that there may be three of them, making him Prince Christian Something Something Something of Denmark.

The gender issue: Queen Margarethe is Queen because there was no direct male heir to the throne, and I believe that the Parliament had to do something to allow for this break in the order of succession. The big question soon after the pregnancy was announced was 'What if it's a girl?' The answer is that Parliament will most likely be changing the constitution so that the right to the throne goes to the oldest, regardless of gender. I believe this is against the wishes of the Queen herself, but not against the wishes of the majority of Danes.

Oh, and both Mother and baby are doing well.

Phew! I feel safer now...don't you?

The big news around here is the threat, heard after last Thursday's horrible events in London, that Denmark could be next. But, according to Søndagsavisen (literally translated as 'the Sunday newspaper', a free paper delivered to homes, presumably Denmark-wide, on Saturday, along with loads of supermarket adverts) 'We are prepared for terror'. Actually, the full headline is 'Police, amusement parks and shopping centers: we are prepared for terror.'

I am glad to know that Denmark is prepared for terror. And I understand why people in any number of places in the world might be nervous for their safety at the moment. But how much security preparedeness do we really need to know intimately about? Should someone in Copenhagen feel safer knowing (as I now know, after reading the Søndagsavisen article) that BonBon-Land can be emptied in a half an hour in case of emergency? Do you out there in the blogosphere feel safer knowing that Rosengårdscentret in Odense and Bruuns Galleri in Århus (both shopping centers) have emergency plans? The director of the Aalborg Zoo (which apparently has a very detailed and thorough emergency procedure) said it best: 'We haven't increased our preparedness after the 11th of September, because we don't think it is necessary for us. Cynically speaking, in my opinion it is totally unrealistic that a terror organization like Al Qaeda would have the desire to plant a bomb in the Aalborg Zoo. For terrorists, it's of course a decisive factor that they get full attention for their terrorist actions, and it would take hours for CNN to get in place in Aalborg.'

This could also explain why the one place in the article that seemed sensible to question about security was Tivoli. But even here, is Tivoli a more logical target because it's a relatively famous amusement park, or because it is in the center of a capital city, and just steps away from downtown, city hall, and the main train station? Of course, my views may well be colored by that fact that I live in Copenhagen. Someone from Odense for example, might find it more logical to think about security at Rosengårdscentret than at Tivoli.

But what do you think? Is anywhere a target for terror, or are there some places (places with large numbers of tourists, places of symbolic importance, governmental places, mass transportation, etc.) which are intrinsically more attractive to those looking to make a violent statement?

Hanging out with Lady Liberty

Well, as you can see, I was able to get my camera to work...for about twenty minutes. So, instead of taking pictures of my favorite signs (the signs are the best part of any demonstration, in my opinion), I restricted myself to writing down the various messages. There was, as one would expect at an anti-Bush rally, a preponderance of anti-Bush slogans, such as 'BUll SHit', 'Bush! Hands off our continent', 'Bush - how do you sleep at night?, and 'Free US from Bush.' Best of show for this category goes to 'Trim that nasty Bush', a nicely handmade sign with a nifty drawing of a pair of scissors.

Other political agendas were as usual also drawn into the fold, my favorite being a very well put together cloth banner reading 'Sustainable energy stops war for oil' on the flip side of 'Shared wealth stops terrorism.' Some of the give away signs also addressed important issues. In the second photo above, you can see the corner of 'Indvandrere er ikke problemet - det er Bush og Fogh' (Immigrants are not the problem - the problem is Bush and Fogh), which is a very right-on take on a very polemic issue at the moment here.

Beyond the signage, it was a lovely day and a very successful protest, from what I could see. The media puts the attendance at 20,000, which means that it may have been a bit more than that. I have had problems finding a good link (though here is a not so good one) to events with pictures in English--even the official site appears not to have been updated yet.

So...when's the next one...and can someone lend me a nice digital camera?

In honor of Bush's visit to Denmark

You Are 39% American

America: You don't love it or want to leave it. But you wouldn't mind giving it an extreme make over. On the 4th of July, you'll fly a freak flag instead... And give Uncle Sam a sucker punch!

How American Are You?

Yes, in fact, Bush has already arrived. At the moment, he may be actually sharing his birthday breakfast with the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Or perhaps they have already moved on to the bilateral talks....

As for me, out of sheer ignorant laziness, I missed both seeing the arrival last night on television (though my boyfriend's mom called to see if we were watching it) and the concert at Fælledparken. I plan to make up for my laziness by marching in protest today, though interestingly, the whole demonstration starts 15 minutes after Bush leaves Denmark to go to Gleneagles. We all (hopefully thousands and thousands and tens of thousands of us) will converge in front of the US Embassy at 2pm, and then march to Christiansborg, where there will be nifty speeches. I will wander around upset that I can't take up-loadable photos, unless a friend lends me a digital camera, or I find one on the street, which are both equally unlikely. Watch this space for all the protest news that's fit to print.

In the meantime, I offer you a quiz in honor of Bush's birthday. As you can see, I scored alarmingly high--it must be for saying 'zee' instead of 'zed'. I dare you to do better, and feel free to post your results as a comment.