Much virtual ink has been spilled over the recent release of The Motorcycle Diaries, a motion picture biography of the young Che Guevara. (See Mark Kleiman for an exhaustive blogography.)

I have nothing substantive to add to the discussion, but I will take this opportunity to quote David Bowie in a blog-post title, and to relate an anecdote from my college days.

Back in college, I and several friends had ourselves listed in the Memphis phone directory with joke names. I was listed as “Opus, P.”; my friend Neil was listed as “Stranger, T. Phantom”; my friend Steve was listed as “Zeppelin, Led”; and my roommate Alex was listed as “Guevara, Che.” I suppose my joke name and Neil’s were too obscure to garner any recognition from the general public, but Steve did receive several late-night phone calls from drunk, outraged rednecks, and Alex did receive quite a bit of Spanish-language junk mail addressed to “Che Guevara.”

UPDATE: Reid at Moteworthy wonders whether Steve was the "Zeppelin, Led" he used to crank call back in high school. It's the right time frame (early 90s), but wrong city. Unless Reid was making long-distance crank calls to Memphis.

As mentioned earlier, Green Party presidential nominee David Cobb appeared at Millsaps for about an hour; he spoke for about 20 minutes, then let audience members ask him questions for the remainder of the time. There was some local TV media in attendance from channels 3 and 13, at least.

I’ll have to say that even though Cobb’s political beliefs are quite opposed to mine in many ways, he’s a very effective speaker, and I think his personal story of growing up as a poor white kid on the Gulf Shore in Texas resonates well with audiences. Of course, he said a bunch of outlandish things (and I think his economic analysis of raising the minimum wage to a “living wage” is frankly laughable, and his “the Iraq War was for oil” analysis is far too simplistic), but I think he also talked with sophistication and depth about a lot of social and political issues—in fact, his discussion of voting reforms (proportional representation and IRV) was about the best I’ve ever seen or heard.

He also had some interesting things to say (in response to a question from me) about his ongoing semi-partnership with Michael Badnarik on the campaign trail; even though the LP and Greens differ on a lot of issues, I think it’s interesting that they both have worked together to achieve common goals—something you’d never see two major-party political candidates do. One thing I’d have been interested in seeing him talk about was how Ralph Nader’s candidacy was affecting his—how do you manage a campaign with another candidate with better name recognition doing essentially the same riff?

Anyway, while I have to say I found a lot of Cobb’s material worthy of eye-rolling, I enjoyed hearing him speak and I think a lot of Americans would be well-served to listen to what he and folks like Badnarik have to say; it’s certainly a breath of fresh air after the canned inanity of Kerry-Bush, and like Cobb said, a lot of the ideas we take for granted today in American politics (good or bad) came from minor parties and their supporters before they were “cool.”

Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb is speaking at Millsaps today at 2:30 p.m.; expect some vague reportage after the appearance, but no liveblogging since Millsaps hasn’t installed any wireless Internet service yet. (Normally I teach Intro from 2:45 to 4 today, but I cancelled class so my students could attend if they chose to do so.)

Robert Clayton Dean at Samizdata makes an interesting argument as to why libertarians should vote.

Did I hear John Kerry correctly on Friday night when he staked out a position in favor of federal subsidies for the poor to exercise any right guaranteed by the Constitution? Here’s the exact quote:

[Y]ou have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life and making certain that you don’t deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the Constitution affords them if they can’t afford it otherwise.

I know he was talking specifically about abortion (while dancing around trying to avoid saying he’d approve federal funding for abortions), but the logical premise was based on any natural right, which presumably would include birth control (Griswold), non-commercial adult sodomy (Lawrence), free speech, free exercise of religion, travel, and a whole host of other rights.

Apparently I’m the only smart person who was completely lost when George W. Bush started talking about Dred Scott v. Sanford during Friday night’s debate. The Baseball Crank writes:

[A]nyone who pays attention to constitutional law debates understood the parallel Bush was trying to draw, however inartfully.

My constitutional law class discussed Dred Scott on Wednesday, and I’d be surprised if any of them had figured out any meaningful parallel to Roe; I certainly hadn’t, in part because Bush’s discussion of the case butchered the basis of the key holding beyond recognition, and in part because Dred Scott was essentially a textualist decision (albeit an “activist” one that struck down a federal law for only the second time in American history).

Meanwhile, Eric Muller elaborates on the “it’s all code” theory, in the process demonstrating Lawrence’s Cardinal Rule:

Surely Karl Rove had scripted some sort of moderately articulate point about the perils of judicial activism on hotly contested matters of personal freedom—something comprehensible and calculated to win over a few voters on the fence—that Bush just totally mangled.

My gut feeling is that—if this was a coded message—anyone who could have figured out the coded message already knew that Bush was committed to appointing justices who believe Roe was wrongly decided on the merits; the “code” theory assumes a remarkable level of political knowledge by the average pro-life voter to be effective, which flies in the face of everything we know about voters in general and (in particular) what Democrats think the general level of intelligence is of pro-lifers.

One Fine Jay and the Backcountry Conservative note the passing of Superman star Christopher Reeve, who died Sunday at the age of 52 after a having heart attack and falling into a coma; a full story is available from the AP.

Curiously enough, Reeve was mentioned by presidential candidate John F. Kerry during Friday night’s presidential debate in response to a question on stem cell research; at least once, Kerry accidentally referred to Reeve in the past tense.

Jon Rowe finds Clayton Cramer inveighing against bukake, admittedly something I don’t particularly see the appeal of for any of the participants. Then again, I strongly suspect it’s the sort of sexual activity (like its single-participant cousin) that only takes place with a camera in the room.