Comparatively Speaking

President Clinton was lucky in one respect, folks. Yes, I'm referring to the fact that a large chunk of his adversaries/critics were just as loathsome as he was (some even more-so). I mean, think about it. You've got the likes of Tom DeLay and Dan Burton hammering him on the political side while, at the same time, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Hannity - those sons of bitches were slandering away in the media. Talk about a cavalcade of slope-heads making poor old "Bubba" look good. THAT was a man-sized dose/the real shit..................................Alright, why do I bring this up?, you ask. I don't know, I guess I'm developing a small fear that President Bush himself may in fact be reaping a similar harvest. I mean, sure, it's not exactly the same in that, no, the "Existential Cowboy" and his lot have a hell of a lot LESS clout than Limbaugh, etc.. Hell, even the Hollywood tripe (Sean Penn, Rosie O'Donnell, etc.) that O'Reilly constantly rails against, really, how much power do even those sons of bitches have? Still, I'm saying, I cannot help but be concerned here. This, me-buckos, in that, no, I am not in any kind of mood for Bush to get off easy. None - WHAT-SO-EVER!!

Rudy's Setting Sun, His Last Stand, Etc.

Honestly, though, folks, as relieved as I am that Giuliani is gone/out of the picture (Bush, with a couple extra chromosomes), there is in fact a part of me....that's actually going to miss him. I mean, come on, all that "material" he provided, all the hyperbole, logical inconsistencies - all the cow-towing, for Christ! Oh well, at least he did get a final one off, saying that, if in fact a Democrat does get elected, we'll be going "back on defense", in terms of fighting terrorism, etc.. "Back on defense." The Democrats are going to get us killed, in other words. Yesssssss!!!!! Sweet, huh?....................................But even beyond the fear-mongering, I'm saying, just that whole "back on defense" statement. I mean, I feel like telling him, hello!!, dammit!!, we never really WERE on defense, dude! Seriously/think about it, lax security at the airports, lax security at the shipping ports, lax security at nuclear plants, the water supply, etc., etc.. And the fact that a lot of these problems remain (funds diverted to Iraq, no doubt), the fact that I could probably still blow up the bow of a ship....if in fact I was bored enough/predisposed. THAT, I'm telling you, is what scares the crap out of me...................................Oh, and, yeah, Mr. Giuliani, where did you put that command and control center again? WHERE? That's what I thought. Wow. And to think that the great Pat Robertson wasted an endorsement on you, ya' bastard. What a shame. What a shame, indeed.

A Rare Moment of Agreement with O'Reilly

How 'bout that "Existentialist Cowboy" (gee, that's original - NOT!!)? What a piece of work that guy is, huh? This, I'm saying, in the damned if this S.O.B. hasn't become one of the major proponents of 9/11 conspiracy crap. I mean, it's not enough that he's been continuing to prop up these same old hackneyed theories (Americans flew the planes, explosives took down the buildings, a missile hit the Pentagon, etc.) that have been totally shredded by the academic community. He's actually calling what most of the world's sane population has taken as factual....and turned it on its head. He ridicules it as "a crazy conspiracy theory about a world-wide conspiracy of radical Arabs and incompetent pilots....and that, no, there's not a scintilla of verifiable evidence in support of it.".................................Man, oh man, oh man. It's like, I feel like asking him, "What about the first World Trade-Center attack, the attacking of the U.S.S. Cole, the bloody explosions in England and France, was/is the U.S. also behind each of these atrocities?" Not that he would respond intelligently, of course....but still...................................P.S. Here is just a small sampling of the professors and journals that have successfully debunked these 9/11 "truthers": Dr. Keith Seffen of Cambridge U, Dr. Walter Murphy of Northwestern, Dr. Ching Chang of UMass, Dr. Joel Conte of Cal-SanDiego, Dr. Christian Hellmich of Vienna U of Tech, the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Fire Engineering, Civil Engineering, Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, Geotimes, and the Journal of Acoustical Society of America. Just to give you something to go on, I'm saying. As for the "Cowboy" himself, I don't know, I have this one feeling that the blankety-blank is only stroking himself (his pipes, etc.)....and that, yes, we should definitely keep an eye on him. Of course, then there's also the other side of me - you know, the one that says, 'mmm, not so much."

A New and, Dare I Say it, Eerie, Definition of Center

I love how O'Reilly constantly refers to Democratic Senators such as Durbin and Leahy as far-left bomb-throwers, out of the American mainstream, etc.. I love it, I'm saying, in that, really, isn't this guy, O'Reilly, supposed to be Mr. Fair and Balanced? I mean, it's fine to call the afore-mentioned fellows whatever you want to call them (not that I would necessarily agree, mind you, but, yes, for the sake of argument, I'm saying) but then, THEN, if in fact you are fair and BALANCED, don't you have to say something similar about Senators Hatch and Inhofe (the latter, especially, for example)? I'm just asking, folks.

Better Than O'Reilly (Much) but, Still

As for Keith Olbermann himself, I guess I have some mixed feelings relative here, too. On the one hand, I find the man both brilliant and refreshing (and, yes, I do in fact agree with the fellow, more often than not). The writing on his show is first-rate and, yes, while he, too, does from time to time bloviate, I've never once caught the man in a blatant mistatement..................................All of this, I'm saying, and, yet, the other part of me does in fact find his show at least a tad peculiar at times. For one thing, he never has anyone on his program that even remotely deviates from HIS "talking points" - kind of a Kumbaya session, in other words. And there isn't even an attempt on his part to hold the Democrats responsible for THEIR transgressions (they do occasionally commit one, right?). I mean, come on, when Bill Clinton made that dispicable comment about Jesse Jackson (a black man, obviously) having himself won South Carolina twice and that, because of this (clearly his implication), Obama's victory there WASN'T significant, was not THAT worthy of a worst person nomination? Seriously, I'm asking.

Coverage Coverage

Bernie Goldberg, a man who I generally find to be hyperbolic/a "Johnny One-Noter" (the liberal mainstream media, yada-yada), actually made a good point the other night. He said that it was unfair for MSNBC to utilize Keith Olbermann (he didn't actually say the name, Keith Olbermann, in that, yes, he was a guest on "The Factor") as an anchor on primary coverage, that MSNBC shouldn't have done that, etc..............................It was a good point, I'm saying, in that, while Olbermann didn't necessarily skew the coverage, per say, his presence I did find to be at least a little awkward. I mean, just look at one simple fact alone. Olbermann, my friends, did not participate in a single interview of any Republican candidate, handler, or even a talking head. Chris Matthews was left with all of those assignments. I mean, yeah, it was probably good discretion to not have Olbermann interview people, the likes of who he's clearly lambasted. But, still, I'm saying, having him in the anchor-chair, period, not necessarily a good idea, in my opinion...................................P.S. Yes, I know that Fox does it as well (Sean Hannity, for example, right there in the middle of it all). And, yes, I also know that Brit Hume hasn't for the longest time been anything close to impartial. I guess I just kind of hold the other cable channels to a higher standard. That's all I'm saying.

The High Cost of Regress

I'm telling you, though, folks, the absolute level of ignorance on the far-right - it's staggering!! Laura Ingraham, for example, she's still of the opinion (this, I'm saying, despite an incredible amount of data to the contrary) that homosexuality and being transgender are "life-style choices". I mean, she even goes as far as to conjur up images of God to buttrass this frigging misinformation. Of course, what's even worse is when she goes on to say (and, yeah, here's where the vindictiveness fuses with her ignorance) that these two groups are in fact poisonous, ruinous of the culture, et.. Talk about mean-spiritedness, huh, being wrong on multiple counts, etc.? And some people actually listen to this crap FOUR HOURS A DAY! Unbelievable...................................Oh, and then there's Tom DeLay on "Hardball" the other night, saying that "Man" has absolutely no impact, ZERO, on the environment/climate change. It's like, I feel like telling this guy, "Go tell that to the poor bastards on the southern tip of Chile, whose staggering rate of skin-cancer has clearly been linked to ozone-depletion. Tell THEM that all the crap we've been putting into the atmosphere hasn't changed the climate. I dare you."...................................I mean, sure, we can quibble over solutions and all but to so categorically deny the obvious like this. It's like, too bad we couldn't just put Mr. DeLay in an alternate universe - you know, one in which the scientists didn't care about, say, flourocarbons, never sought to study/purge them from the atmosphere, etc.. This, I'm saying, in that, seriously, I can almost hear that bastard hacking pronto/as we speak..................................Sympathy? Sure, a little.