Lying About Your Opponent is Only Bad (Apparently) When Your Opponent Does it

It appears, folks, that Congressman Alan Grayson may in fact himself have committed a "Breitbart" (or, as other people prefer to call it, a "Hannity"). Yes, folks, I'm referring to that latest over-the-top ad of his against his current opponent, Daniel Webster (Taliban Dan, he refers to him as). In this particular ad, footage is shown in which Mr. Webster is apparently quoting the Bible verse which says that women should in fact "submit" to their husbands. And, yes, even worse than that, the footage seemingly reveals Mr. Webster of being a proponent of this type of sentiment. Yeah, well, guess what, folks. I've in fact seen the entire clip and Mr. Webster doesn't even remotely subscribe to the sentiment. Grayson and his campaign flunkies flagrantly spliced/diced the tape to flat-out make the fellow look bad. You know, kind of like what THEY; Breitbart, Hannity, Bozell, etc. do when THEY take out THEIR hatchets...................................................................................................And, no, folks, this is hardly the only slimy ad that's come from Mr. Grayson. His campaign has also run an ad in which they've basically called Mr. Webster a draft-dodger, a person who refused to serve his country, etc.. Yes, Mr. Webster DID receive four draft deferments. But as soon as his education was over, so, too, he DID report, and the only reason that he didn't serve was because he failed his physical (yes, basically the same career contingencies as Vice President Biden). Hardly a draft-dodger, in other words. Oh, and, yeah, just for the record, Congressman Grayson didn't serve in the military, either.................................................................................................P.S. My advice to the far-left folks out there would be to just flat-out distance themselves from this guy. I mean, come on, it's not like there aren't a bunch of good, decent liberals out there to replace him with; Russ Feingold and Ed Markey, just to name a few. Why waste such precious political capitol on such a douche/nut-job? It just isn't worth it, in my opinion.

The Not-So Babbling Brooks

David Brooks is one of those conservatives (though, yes, center-right may in fact be a more accurate way to describe him) that other conservatives seem to abhor.....I like David Brooks. And, no, it isn't because he's easy on the liberals, either. He isn't. In fact, folks, Brooks is one of the very few commentators out there who holds both sides' feet to the fire. And, while, no, there aren't a lot of self-evident political truths out there that one could reliably hang his or her hat on, there is in fact one. And, yes, Mr. Brooks has nailed it. As long, folks, as the Democrats refuse to reduce spending (yes, the Republicans are guilty on this one, too) and the Republicans refuse to raise taxes, we are never, EVER, going to make a dent in this deficit/debt problem.....Food for thought, as Brooks, etc., ostensibly the responsible ones, ponder a third way.

No Oxford/No Conscience

I could care less that Christine O'Donnell "dabbled in witchcraft". Compared to a lot of the shit that I used to dabble in, that, me-buckos, is a total amateur show. But, I do have to tell you here, a spate of those other quotes attributed to her DO concern me. For instance, this is a woman who thinks that a) evolution is a myth and b) evolution (as a concept) happens in real time ("Why aren't monkeys evolving now?", she wants to know). Do we really want this level of anti-intellectualism in the U.S. Senate?..................................................................................................And, yes, what about her morality, too? This, folks, is a woman who apparently thinks that, while it may be A.O.K. to lie on your resume (it's been shown that she significantly padded her educational credentials), it wouldn't be A.O.K. to lie to the Nazis to protect a young Anne Frank/her family. Do we really want THAT level of moral decay in a branch of government that's already far, FAR, gone in that regard? Me, I'm not entirely thinking so.

Channelling Al

"They say you should not drink alcohol when it's hot out.....Something I read.....For they say it dehydrates you. But I subscribe to the law of contrary public opinion. Everybody says one thing, I say....bet the other way." "Added to which you know they're wrong." "That's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying!"......Al Pacino and Jonathan Pryce from "Glengarry Glen Ross" (the lounge scene between Mr.s Pacino and Pryce)

And This to Mr. Hannity

Hannity, DUDE, are you EVER gonna' take a powder on Jeremiah Wright? I mean, come on! Yes, the guy is divisive and, yes, Mr. Obama probably should have never gone to his church. But 1) do you really think that Mr. Obama subscribes to the reverend's beliefs (I personally think that Obama went there strictly for political purposes; an attempt to connect to the black community in Chicago, etc.)? And 2) what about all of those knuckle-headed preachers on YOUR side of the divide? Have not those individuals been pretty damned frigging divisive, too?....And, yes, while we're at it here, what about you and your......OH, NEVER MIND!

A Few Brief Notes to Ann Coulter, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Rachel Maddow

1) Ms. Coulter, that same "joke" that Stephen Colbert tends do "night after night after night" - it's a little something we call....a character. You know, like Carol O'Connor was Archie Bunker....for almost 20 years, like Kelsey Grammer was Frasier Crane....for almost 20 years. I mean, yeah, I certainly understand why somebody like YOU wouldn't find him funny; the fact that he's eviscerating/lampooning people on your side of the political divide, etc.. But to say that he's basically telling the same joke night after night is basically buffoonish. You really might want to reconsider this one.......2) Mr. Netanyahu, please, I'm begging you, put a stop to these settlements. The only things that you're even remotely accomplishing here are a) ruining whatever small chance there might have been for a peace settlement and b) making your country (which I have generally supported and defended) look even more like a piranha. And, besides, when and if there ever is peace settlement, do you really want another scene the likes of which you had in Gaza (the ugly uprooting of the settlers there)? Of course, if you're actually thinking that these settlements could be permanent, then, no, I really don't know what else to tell you here.......3) Ms. Maddow, once again you have mischaracterized the position of a person whom you disagree with. Senator Bunning (earlier this year) was not opposing an extension of unemployment benefits. He certainly wasn't "waging a war on the unemployed" (gee, ever use hyperbole much?). He was simply advocating (strongly, admittedly) that these benefits be paid for (via the unspent stimulus money, reductions in other government spending, etc.). Now, certainly, one could legitimately argue with him on this. But to constantly make the guy out to be a monster is patently sleazy.

Denying the Sky

I'm telling you here, folks. These partisan radio and cable-news stooges - these people never, EVER, admit that they're wrong. Nor do they ever apologize, either. I mean, we all remember the O'Reilly classic, right - him having said that that young kidnapped kid had actually enjoyed being with his captor (in reality, he was being butt-fucked by him), him never admitting to saying it, never apologizing for it, etc.....................................................................................................Of course, folks, if it were only Mr. O'Reilly pulling these stunts, that, clearly, would be shitty enough. But it ISN'T just him. Keith Olbermann and Sean Hannity, for example - these individuals constantly make mistakes. And, yes, me-buckos, so, too, do the frigging women; Laura Ingraham, ESPECIALLY!! I mean, just the frigging nasty comments about Meghan McCain (she's a Barbie Doll, a plus-sized model, imitating her as if she were a damned flaming bimb, etc.) - comments that, TO THIS DAY, she still denies making (this, despite the fact that the tape of her saying them utterly convicts her)....................................................................................................Now, don't get me wrong here. There aren't a lot of us out there who DO like to admit it when we're wrong. But, damn it, when you've also got a radio and/or television show that's supposedly informing people, maybe you've got a little big more in terms of responsibility. Maybe, I'm saying.

A Little Less Grease, Please

There aren't a lot of ways in which you can a) save some money and b) help to save the environment, too. Here, me-buckos, is an incredibly easy one; simple - change the oil on your car less often. Yeah, you heard me right - LESS OFTEN...........................................................................................In fact, folks, a majority of the automotive experts say that you can actually go up to 5-10,000 miles between oil changes (with newer cars, especially - this, as opposed to the "recommended" 3,000 miles). I mean, sure, your mechanic/Jiffy Lube technician may end up resenting you (and hopefully the SOBs won't go on a fishing expedition in order to ratchet up your tally, etc.) but, still, think about it here - more money in your wallet....and less of that nasty stuff in the landfill. Sounds like a total win-win to me.

Miscellaneous 27

1) That character who "invented" Facebook (gee, how long had that one been staring us in the face?) - I just found out. That blankety blank is worth more than Steve Jobs. ONLY....IN....AMERICA!!......2) Keith Olbermann asked one of his carbon-copy colleagues this week, "So, what exactly should "we" (I'm not exactly sure who he was talking about here) "do" about Fox?" I'm serious, folks, that's exactly what he asked. And, yes, of course, I started thinking, too, OVERTIME, "What do you mean, what should we do about Fox? You either watch it or you don't watch it. You either praise it or you criticize it. It's not exactly rocket-science, Mr. Keith. I mean, come on here, you didn't mean that we (as in the government) should take it off the air, did you? My God, I certainly hope not. Because you also know what 'they' have to say about that, right; 'first they came for the....'".......3) I don't want to say that big-time college football is messed up or anything....but, yeah, me-buckos, it really kind of is. And, no, I'm not even talking about the dirtier elements of it; the bullshit agents, all of the frigging monetary bull-crap, the idiotic way that they decide the championship, etc.. No, folks, I'm talking about the much more elemental aspects. Take, for instance, the conferences. For almost 20 years, the Big Ten Conference has been playing, not with 10 teams but 11. And next year, after Nebraska joins them, there's going to be 12 of them. Contrast this with the actual Big 12. They, starting next year, after the defections of Nebraska and Colorado (they'll be playing in the Pac 10 - who, along with Utah, will be making that the Pac 12) will only have, HELLO, 10 teams. So, unless the names of these conferences change, the Big Ten will have 12 teams and the Big 12 will have 10 teams. Wow, huh? Hey, maybe we should just offer all of these conference and NCAA officials/school presidents a course in remedial math. Maybe that'll frigging help 'em.

"Something Something", With Will....

At the end of every Friday program, Olbermann has been reading these excerpts from his favorite James Thurber volume. Yeah, it's a little bit weird but, hey, why not? It's his show. He should be able to do whatever he wants to on it................................................................................................Which leads me to kind of wonder out loud a little. What kind of self-indulgent stuff would I put on a show if I ever had one? Hm, I don't know, folks. Me - I'd probably show a bunch of film-clips from my favorite Greta Garbo and Montgomery Clift movies; him in the row-boat with Shelley Winters, right before it capsizes in "A Place in the Sun", her in the old bar with John Gilbert, playfully pretending to be a boy in "Queen Christina", stuff like that.....Oh and, yeah, what about a little Burt Lancaster, too; that initial sermon of his in "Elmer Gantry", that boffo scene in "Atlantic City" when he finally gets to kill a guy (his reaction, remember? - "I did it! I really did it! Did you see me do it?")? Seriously, though, how frigging over-the-top cool would that be?....I gotta get me a show.

What Do You Say We "Pay" For Everything?

I really liked it when David Gregory pressed Mitch McConnell on the tax-cut issue (the Republican proposal for an extension of the Bush tax-cuts for people making over $250,000 a year); the fact that the Republicans haven't stated how in fact they intend to pay for the $700,000,000,000 shortfall in revenue. BUT, you know what else that I wish that these interviewers would ask? I wish that they would ask ALL of these politicians (Republicans AND Democrats), "So, how in the hell do you intend to 'pay for' the $3,700,000,000,000 (don't you just love all of these zeros - NOT?) shortfall that a total extension of the Bush tax-cuts would cost us/the Treasury?" I mean, come on here, folks, isn't that in fact where the real money is (and, no, apart from Fareed Zakaria, I haven't heard a whole lot of people talking about the issue)?

Racial Politics, With an Accent

According to California Congresswoman, Loretta Sanchez (translated from Spanish), "The Vietnamese and the Republicans are, with an intensity, trying to take this (i.e., her) seat.".....Hm. Wow, huh? Talk about her throwing out some red-meat here. Today's "Worst Person in the World"? Maybe? I don't know, I guess that we'll just have to wait and see....NOT!!

Miscellaneous 26

1) While I agree with my liberal colleagues that a large chunk of these new Republican candidates is exceedingly poor, I'm still not precisely sure what the Democratic message is. It almost sounds as if they're saying that, "yeah, we're piss-poor, but those Republicans bastards are even more piss-poor/you think that things are bad now, wait until those knuckle-dragging Tea Partiers take over/etc.." Of course, what in the hell else can they say. "We" just spent 862 billion dollars on a stimulus package and 1) the unemployment rate is still close to 10% (yeah, maybe it would have been higher without it - the stimulus - but, still, wasn't it the Dems who said that it wouldn't go over 8%?) and 2) the infrastructure is still crumbling. Add to that the fact that it was a Democratic President who recently sent 30,000 American youngsters into that grinder over in Afghanistan and, yeah, maybe pointing out the depravity of clowns like Angle and O'Donneell IS the best strategy. I guess that we'll just have to see.......2) Sean Hannity engages in what I can only refer to as journalistic prestidigitation. I'm serious. This is a guy, folks, who can literally dice and slice and rearrange the footage he has to basically prove anything. The latest example of this occurred just the other night. He showed a clip of President Obama's recent town-hall meeting. It showed this guy asking Mr. Obama a question. It then showed a later clip (post the meeting) in which the same guy lamented the fact that the President "didn't really answer my question. You know what the footage didn't show? It didn't show the actual answer from the President. So, no, we really don't know if the President adequately answered the question or not. Hey, maybe the guy who asked the question wasn't predisposed to liking ANY answer from the President. And, yes, thanks to Mr. Hannity here, we're only left to speculate.......3) University of Miami quarterback, Jacory Harris, is a huge talent. This fellow, despite being a little on the frail side, has a major-league arm - both in terms of strength and accuracy. But for some inexplicable reason, he also has a penchant to throw interceptions; 17 last season and 6 already this year (3 games). I don't know, maybe it's an overconfidence thing (the dreaded Bret Favre syndrome), thinking that he's capable of threading the needle on virtually every throw. Or maybe it's just a maturity thing (the fellow never got a chance to red-shirt). Whatever it is, he had better clear it up pronto. This, folks, in that it's not only hurting him, it's hurting the team (last year it cost him the Clemson and North Carolina games, this year the Ohio State game).

One Of These Days I Wish That Somebody Would Play Procedural Games With Their Liberty

Not a single Republican Senator voted to bring "don't ask, don't tell" to the floor of that body for debate. Zero. Not Olympia Snowe, not Susan Collins, not George Voinovich, not Bob Corker, not Lindsey Graham, not Judd Gregg, not Dick Lugar, not Scott Brown (the who's who of reasonable Republicans) - NONE OF THEM. And, no, folks, at this point, I couldn't give a rat's ass that Harry Reid may in fact have played some games here. These Republicans (Snowe and Collins, especially) put party over principle here ( both of these Senators had at various points advocated for a repeal of DADT) and, yes, for that, they should feel totally ashamed. Sorry, folks, for the sharpness on this, but on this particular issue, I DO have strong feelings.

Miscellaneous 25

1) Say what you want about Jimmy Carter; that the fellow was a less than stellar President, that he's clearly been more than a little meddlesome when it comes to foreign policy (during his post-Presidential years, I'm saying), etc.. But, I'm also telling you here, you do in fact have to give him SOME credit. One, he speaks his mind - no BS. And, two, he actually does put forth some wisdom occasionally. For instance, last night, on Larry King, Mr. Carter made this rather astute observation, "I think that the Newt Gingrich of five years ago would be appalled at what the Newt Gingrich of today is saying." I mean, sure, maybe he's giving the Newt Gingrich of five years ago a little too much credit. But, still, I liked the comment and, yeah, I basically agreed with it.......2) I'm wondering, folks. What if they could prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this Christine O'Donnell chick DID use campaign contributions to pay her for her rent, etc.. Would Mr. Hannity AT THAT POINT admit that maybe, just maybe, this wasn't the greatest of selections? I don't know, I'm not entirely convinced that he would.......3) My feelings toward dancer, singer, and actress, Ann Miller, have always been pretty straight forward. Basically, folks, I've always thought that she was majorly hot during her pre-helmet-hair era but, yes, considerably less than stellar with the helmet-hair (age probably being a factor here, as well). But, I gotta tell you here. I just might be in the process of altering this opinion. I've been checking out a few of her videos from the mid-60s (well into the helmet-hair era and she, well into her 40s) and, I gotta be honest with you, I was frigging gassed by them. Yes, she had the helmet-hair but, BOOM, so, too, did she still have the baby-doll face, the effervescence, the nearly flawless figure (35B-25-36, 5' 7" 125-130), etc.. I'm pretty sure that I still would have married her. And, besides, the helmet-hair was just for her performances. I'm pretty sure that I could have gotten her to wash out the hairspray at night - you know, right before our beddy-by and shit.

From Clare Boothe Luce and Margaret Chase Smith.....to THIS?

Anybody can make a gaffe (yes, folks, President Obama included). Me, for example - I've made a veritable shit-load of 'em. But, folks, I also have to say here that, yes, the lot of these far-right female Republicans have really been upping the tally lately - demonstrably! You've got Palin basically inventing words. You've got this O'Donnell chick using real words incorrectly. And then, of course, you've got Bachmann not even knowing rudimentary current events (proclaiming O'Donnell will in fact be Delaware's "next governor"). Add these three to Sharron Angle and her "second amendment remedies", her literally running like a deer from the press (and, yes, when I say, literally, I mean I actually saw her RUN from local reporters) and, yeah, there does seem to be a flat-out trend evolving here...............................................................................................And the thing is, folks, I actually DO want more women to get involved in Republican politics (ditto, Democratic). It would in fact be a good thing - in my estimation. But, paaaaleeeese! Can we at least get some articulate/lesser paranoid individuals (remember Bachmann and HER suggestion that Democratic members of Congress be investigated by the media for anti-Americanism?)? And, NO, they don't necessarily have to be moderates (though, yes, as moderate, I would personally prefer that), either - just not frigging caricatures..........................................................................................P.S. Just to be fair and balanced here, I should probably point out that there is also a fair share of Democratic wing-nuts and morons, too. The most obvious example would clearly have to be that Alvin Greene character from South Carolina. But, damn it, there's also Mr. Alan Grayson (wow, now there's a fellow who could really use an intervention) and people like that.....And, yet, right now, as we speak, I'd still have to say that this new Tea Partying gang of right-wing females rules - at least for now, anyway.

Monday Morning Foolishness

Of all the topics that seem to get the Tea Party folks bonkers, highly prime amongst them is TARP. In fact, folks, I don't think that they've supported one single candidate (Democrat OR Republican) who voted for it - the generally reliably conservative, Bob Bennett, amongst them..........................................................................................But, clearly, I do wish that they would take a quick breather here. First of all, THEY WEREN'T THERE. They didn't have to take the tough vote/listen to economists from across the political spectrum tell them that they literally had to do this in order to prevent a monumental collapse. It's the easiest thing in the world to second-guess all of these politicians NOW...........................................................................................But even with the second-guessing here, the Tea Partiers may in fact be incorrect. This, folks, in that yeah, TARP may indeed have worked. The banks DIDN'T go under and the vast percentage of the money has been restored to the treasury. I mean, I do agree with these folks that we really need to try and avoid this scenario in the future but, come on here, what do you say that we ALL put a screaming halt to this vilification. That, amongst a whole hell of lot of other things, to me, is getting powerfully stale.

Somewhat Friendly Territory

I'm a little bit disappointed in O'Reilly. He interviewed Sharron Angle the other night and, while, no, it wasn't the love-fest that his colleague, Sean Hannity, would have instituted, it wasn't exactly a hard hitting talk, either. He didn't, for example, press her on some of the more controversial comments of hers, the fact that she still flat-out refuses to face the Nevada media (I refer to the footage in which she is literally running away from local reporters), etc...........................................................................................Perhaps most disappointing, though, was when he indulgently commiserated with her on just what a big fat dick her opponent, Harry Reid, is (yes, he IS a dick, but that is totally beside the point), taking some swipes at Pelosi and Obama in the process. That, me-buckos, is, if in fact he really and truly wants to be seen as an impartial arbiter, something that he probably should refrain from. No spin, no?

Those Who Ignore History Are.....Well, They're Just Plain Stupid

VH1 just came out with their "top 100 artists of all time" rankings. And while, yes, I know that ALL of these lists are totally subjective (this one, for instance, had a numb-nuts the caliber of Justin Timberlake rated ahead of such legendary performers as Van Morrison and the Pretenders - that, and they didn't even have CCR listed at all) and shit, these characters did something completely beyond the pale. They actually put Elvis Presley at (GET THIS) number 8 - trailing such other "artists" as Michael Jackson (2), Led Zeppelin (3), and Prince (7 - yeah, they actually put him behind Prince). I mean, talk about an outrage/a bunch of frigging douche-bags totally ill equipped to see the entire picture.............................................................................................So, where, if not at number 8, SHOULD Mr. Presley have been ranked? Certainly in the top 5, no? I mean, think about it, for Christ. Even some of the acts that you COULD make a case for putting ahead of Elvis; Bob Dylan (5) and John Lennon (The Beatles - 1), for instance - these guys are on record as saying that the ONLY reason that they ever even picked up a guitar in the first place was, yeah, you got it, Elvis Presley. That, to me, speaks mega-volumes.............................................................................................P.S. Just for the record, I personally am not an Elvis fan. He just doesn't do it for me. But 1) he is the king and 2) there's never been an artist who's been more influential. It just doesn't make any sense at all for him to have been rated #8.

The Eternal Power of Almost

Take a gander. Quick. Over there. That's the son of a bitch who took a swan-dive off of Dexter's coffin. You know, one of the very few of 'em there who actually lived. Yeah, well, guess what. NOW, according to Retch, that son of a bitch NEVER wants to die. Youza, huh? So much for Tracy Jane Bubkas (currently pushing 60 and looking it) and HER power/reign over the species.

Unconditional Something

My mother was a lifelong Democrat - reliable, died in the wool, etc.. But for some strange/inexplicable reason, she also liked Richard Nixon (I remember the bumper-sticker on our '66 Beetle; "Our Nation Needs Fixin', Elect Dick Nixon"). Not only, folks, did she support and vote for Mr. Nixon, she also defended him during Watergate ("They all did stuff like this, he just got caught, that's all"). And she continued to defend him, right up until the day that he AND she died. Gee, you don't think that she had a crush on him, do you? Eeeewwww, huh?

Another Newtonian Physic

Every time I think that Newt Gingrich can't possibly go any lower, he ends up going significantly lower. It seems as if the former speaker is now giving credence to the despicable words of one Dinesh D'Souza; that President Obama's father was a "philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anti-colonial ambitions" (I guess that Mr.s D'Souza - his own people having been victimized by European colonialism - and Gingrich represent the PRO-colonial wing of the Republican party), that the President's father was also a "polygamist", a "wife beater", and a "drunk driver", and that the President himself is "only living out his father's dream, that the "invisible father provides the inspiration and that the "son dutifully gets the job done, and that "America today is governed by a ghost." Mr. Gingrich calls these "assessments" by D'Souza "the most profound insights I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama and, yes, agrees with D'Souza that President Obama has indeed been pursuing a "Kenyan anti-colonial agenda."...............................................................................................WHERE DO I EVEN START? Hm, how 'bout here. Let us assume that everything Mr. D'Souza has said about President Obama's father is accurate (no, it apparently isn't but, just for the sake of argument, I'm saying). Since when in this country do we punish the son for the crimes of the father? Joe Kennedy Sr. was frigging anti-Semite/Nazi sympathizer who got his sorry ass canned by FDR in the '30s. All of this, me-buckos, and, yet, HIS SONS (JFK and RFK, especially, but, yes, Teddy, too) grew up to be great American heroes. Why couldn't the same ultimately be true for President Obama? I mean, come on here, he isn't even half-way through his first term in office................................................................................................And then there are the merits (or lack thereof) of Mr. Gingrich's specific charge. I mean, think about it, folks. He's calling a guy who recently sent 30,000 American troops to Afghanistan and who's frigging bombing the tar out of northern Pakistan a Kenyan anti-colonial. Does that frigging make any sense - at all? And what about, too, the fact that he blew those Somali pirates to hell and back? Anti-colonial - yeah, right................................................................................................Look, folks, I do not in any way enjoy this (i.e., the ripping of new ones). But what Mr.s Gingrich and D'Souza are doing here is flat-out wrong. Yes, Mr. Obama is a flawed President/person (and, yes, the citizenry is free to vote him out if they wish to), but he's also a decent man and he does NOT deserve this type of treatment and innuendo............................................................................................P.S. Before anybody accuses me of partisanship here, please, let it be known, I also defended Mr.s Bush (charges of Nazism) and McCain (charges of collaborating with the North Vietnamese) when they were being smeared. Consistency, folks, is what I'm mostly striving for here.

Miscellaneous 24

1) While I don't despise Ann Coulter as much as some of my colleagues seem to, I DO have to agree with these folks to a certain degree. This, in that, yes, it's clearly a stretch to say that this woman thinks of things logically. For instance, Ms. Coulter consistently says that it isn't "bad Muslims" (nonobservant Muslims, in other words) who we need to fear but "good Muslims" (those who do in fact practice the faith). This, me-buckos, and, yet, who in the hell did she want us to topple ten or so years ago, but Saddam Hussein! Yeah, that's right, Saddam Hussein, the absolute WORST Muslim (this, according to HER criteria) EVER (I mean, this frigging ass-hole didn't even know how many times to pray each day)!! Talk about a line of "reasoning" that just flat-out doesn't add up.......2) Hey, I'll admit it, folks. Olbermann isn't always full of shit. This, I'm saying, in that, yes, he does from time to time come out with something useful. Tonight, for instance, Olbermann pointed out that the World Trade Center buildings actually had, not one but two mosques housed in it. This, folks, is obviously important in that it flat-out shows how Muslims suffered and died, too, on 9/11.....I should probably just leave it at that.......3) I saw Patricia Neal, in "The Fountainhead"(1949) tonight. Wow, folks. I had totally forgotten just how 1) hot and 2) talented that this actress was. What a total shame that her career had to be damaged so because of those health problems. But, even so, "A Face in the Crowd", "HUD", "The Subject Was Roses", etc.. Extremely underrated, I'm thinking.

Evidence Front (AKA, Mad-Dow's Disease)

Rachel Maddow brought out a chart the other night that really made Republican Presidents look shitty. It was a graph that showed how income growth (from 1948 to the present - for everybody but especially for poor folks) has been significantly better under Democratic Presidents than Republican ones. And, yes, folks, it was actually quite a compelling proffer that she made....But then I started to think about it.................................................................................................First of all, I found it a little convenient that the study starts in 1948, after the Depression/the Roosevelt era. It would have been, to me anyway, very interesting to see how the inclusion of those years would have impacted upon the overall averages. Secondly, I think that it's also important to point out that 3 of these Democratic Presidents (Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson) presided in office during a period of American preeminence (not a lot of foreign competition, outsourcing, etc.). Thirdly, the study flat-out ignores the Congressional component. During the Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan (parts of it, anyway), and Bush 1 years, for example, there was a Democratic Congress in addition (and, yes, a Republican Congress when Clinton was in the White House). And then, lastly, there's Nixon. I underscore this in that damned if that fellow didn't act exactly like a Democrat in office (his domestic agenda, especially). Ergo, it probably isn't even remotely fair to lump him in with Bush and Reagan......................................................................................................Now, this, of course, isn't to say that we AREN'T better off with a Democrat in the White House. My God, there's AT LEAST a 50-50 chance that we are. But to have selectively taken what is clearly only a correlation, and to have extrapolated from it causality - what can I say here, you are kind of getting into the propaganda realm. Take it with a big grain of salt, I guess is what I'm saying.

Channelling Howard

"(softly and reflectively) I hope John Tate never fights again.....(loudly and far more decisively) THE MAN WHOSE HUMAN DIGNITY HAS BEEN STRIPPED BY BOXING PROMOTERS, THE WBA, THE WBC - RUMP ORGANIZATIONS!....(quietly and reflectively again) I hope John Tate never fights again.".....LOL My God, why do I even remember stuff like this?

"Don't"

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what would be your advice to a person who was just about to put a big bowl of chick peas into the microwave?"

"THERE IS....NO GOD."

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what were the first words out of your mouth when you learned that Vivica A. Fox once dated 'Fitty'?"

Let's Get Ready to....Pray?...Rumble?...Hope For the Best?

It hasn't happened yet (as far as I know). But trust me here, it will. Yeah, that's right, folks, one of these days, when one of those MMA fighters gets brutally knocked out, he (or even possibly she) isn't going to wake up from it. I mean, seriously here, have you ever gotten a load of some of those knockouts? The frigging guy gets knocked out....and before the referee can get in there to stop it, the victorious fighter (amped to the gills, evidently) lands upwards of 3-4 additional punches to the fallen "warrior's" head (yeah, that's right, while he's already unconscious and his head is pinned against an unforgiving ring floor). I can't believe that somebody hasn't died already............................................................................................But let's just say that nobody does die for a while. Does anybody in his right mind think that there isn't going to be a rash of dementia among these fighters down the road? I mean, even guys like the "Ice Man", Chuck Liddell - guys who generally won but who may in fact have stayed in "it" too long - even guys like THAT could have some trouble (Liddell, for instance, lost 5 of his last 6 fights - 4 of which were via the devastating knockout route). How are we going to react to that? I'm wondering.............................................................................................P.S. I am not in any way advocating that we abolish this sport. As far as I'm concerned, it's still a free country and, yeah, if a couple of people want to annihilate each other, hey, who in the hell am I to stop 'em? But, really here, folks, what in the hell does it say about those of us who watch it? I'm seriously wondering about that, too.

Miscellaneous 23

1) I was watching Hannity tonight and, who shows up but Sharron Angle (a continuation of her "I'm only going to friendly venues" strategy - obviously). I was actually going to watch it but when the first words out of Ms. Angle's yapper (even before Hannity was able to put forth his first question, mind you) were, "You're a great American patriot, Sean", I totally had to turn it.........................................................................................But, yes, folks, that is only half the story. When I flipped it on over to CNN/Larry King, guess who Mr. King was interviewing. He was interviewing Cal Tech physics professor/Stephen Hawking collaborator, Leonard Mlodinow. Talk about a major-league contrast, huh?......2) As a person who's been called a "Reich-winger" by certain bloggers on the left (Lydia Cornell's site) and a "Palin-hating liberal"/"member of the Obama police" by certain bloggers on the right (tammybruce.com), I probably have been a little too reticent to fully address my true political leanings. I mean, yes, I know that I've stated here and elsewhere that I'm exceedingly liberal on social issues/civil liberties/military matters and significantly more moderate on the economy - stuff like that. But what in the hell does that really tell you, other than I'm a boring individual? Hows' about I put it in these terms for you? Yes, I do tend to vote Democrat (no, not always - this, in that I did vote for Weicker, Rell, and Bush #1) but rarely, if ever, am I purely enthusiastic about it. Does THAT, folks, put it into less boring terms for you? I sure as hell hope that it does.

You're Not Funny - Not Even a Little

What would be my answer to the question, "So, if you could only say one thing to Rachel Maddow, what would that one thing be?"......Yes, I know, Red Skelton used to laugh at his jokes, too. But his jokes, folks, were actually funny. There's the distinction.

Quote For the Day

"The reason I am not a politician, is that I want to understand." Raymond Aron......I like the hell out of this quote and, yeah, I'm sending it out to all of the conservatives who mindlessly supported the Republican (and, yes, unpaid for) tax cuts to the wealthy AND to all of the liberals who mindlessly supported the Democratic (and, yes, incredibly poorly constructed) stimulus package. This one's for you, good people.

What Do You Say That We ALL Stop Burning Shit

First of all, I want to make it perfectly clear that I agree with everybody who's been criticizing that idiotic pastor who plans to burn the Koran. His proposed action is nothing but a selfish and bigoted maneuver that absolutely puts American troops in further/potential danger. But, I also have to tell you here, my friends, there is in fact something else that bothers me.....Yep, you got it - all of those countless film clips of radical Muslims burning the American flag. I would certainly like that shit to come to screaming halt as well.....It would only be frigging fair, no?

Like a Numbnuts With His Head Cut Off

I'm still not exactly sure what Sean Hannity wants to do about this mosque situation. Does he actually want the government to halt the construction of it? Or, OR, does he just want to continue to hammer away, brow beat the imam, etc. - and, yes, mebuckos, hope that an hysterical onslaught such as this will cause these Muslims to simply back down/build the frigging mosque elsewhere? It's extremely hard to tell, folks. Hell, I'm not even entirely sure if HE, Hannity himself, has thought it all through, honestly...................................................................................................P.S. It also must be stated that Hannity may in fact get his way in the end. This, in that, at least from what I can gather, most of the local construction workers have flat-out refused to work on the project. Hm. Could in fact be quite interesting - the next several months or so.

Chris Jansing/Mika Brzezinski, Alisyn Camerota, and Jessica Yellin

What would be my answer to the question, "So who's your favorite (I'm talking hotness here) newswoman from each of the 3 major cable news networks?".....FYI, I just couldn't pick between Jansing and Mika.....Believe me, I tried.

Limousine Something

I think that we were all a little mystified when Mr. Gore decided to build his 20 room mansion (not including the 8 bathrooms) right next to the Pacific Ocean (you know, what with his fervent belief that global warming would inevitably cause the sea levels to rise and all). What we were even less prepared for, though, was our discovery that the entire structure (pool, pool house, and guest house, included) was being heated by natural gas (consuming more of this type of energy than the average American household would utilize in an entire year). Not exactly the most green approach, in other words (yes, it's better than heating with coal or oil but it's absolutely still a fossil fuel). I mean, I know that the guy shouldn't necessarily be held to the same standards as an ordinary citizen (the size of his "operation", etc.) and all but, still, don't you think that maybe he could have come up with something at least a little better than this?............................................................................................P.S. Compare Mr. Gore's mansion to this building. This one, folks, is only 4,000 square feet and is heated entirely with geothermal heat pumps. No fossil fuels whatsoever are used. Overall, the house consumes only 25% of the electricity of a conventional system. Rainwater and waste-water are continuously collected and purified. Pretty damn impressive, huh? Any idea whose house this is? It's George W. Bush's house. Go figure, huh?...........................................................................................Now, does this in any way make George W. Bush a better human being than Mr. Gore? Obviously, it does not (I mean, come on, W got us involved in Iraq, for Christ). But what it does show us is that 1) the people who we glorify aren't always the Gods that we make them out to be and 2) the people who we vilify, neither are they necessarily as bad.

"He Means Did You Boink Her Yet, Ya' Dink?"

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what's your all-time favorite Carla Tortelli line (this one she delivered in response to Cliffy's inability to comprehend the much more subtle attempts to elicit the info)?"

Here Are the Stats, Folks (Courtesy of the FBI)

In 2001 (the year of 9/11), there was indeed a spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes. Still, it was only 481 occurrences nationwide (the vast majority of which were nonviolent). More importantly, in 2002 and 2003, it dipped all the way back down to 155 and 149 respectively (and it continued at that level throughout the decade). Couple these stats with the fact that anti-Jewish hate crimes have continued to occur at a rate six times more frequently (three times more frequently when you take into account the population difference) than that of those directed at Muslims and, yeah, you really do have to take a look at the motivation of some of these talking-heads here (yeah, I'm talking to you, Keith Olbermann)...............................................................................................Now, yes, it's entirely possible that another spike may in fact materialize (2008 is the most recent year of these FBI records). BUT, until we actually get the 2010 numbers, we really can't say for sure (and, yes, to do so would indeed be QUITE irresponsible) whether or not we ARE entering this new era of anti-Muslim behavior. Sorry 'bout that, Keith.

Kenny G/Michael Bolton

What would be MY answer to the question, "So, who do YOU think is the worst person in U.S. history?"

Miscellaneous 22

1) In my opinion, Olbermann and O'Reilly have BOTH made jerks out of themselves over this whole mosque controversy. First it was Mr. Olbermann citing a spate of apparent anti-Muslim activities and using THAT as evidence (Mr. Olbermann evidently never having learned the limitations of anecdotal evidence during all of those storied years of his at Cornell) that the country was now entering a new era of anti-Islamic feelings. Not to be outdone, of course, by Olbermann, O'Reilly counters here by dragging out a 2 year old study that shows an extreme paucity of anti-Muslim sentiment in America (the problem obviously being that things could have possibly changed in the past several years). The exact opposite, in other words.....Wow. CAN YOU, people, see why I'm not exactly a big fan of these fellas'?......2) As a result of his support for the mosque near/at ground zero, Mayor Bloomberg's poll ratings took a 14 point swan-dive. How did Mr. Mayor respond to this? He didn't/stayed true to his convictions. Compare this, folks/I ask you, to the tap-dance that President Obama engaged in.....I'm telling you here, if in fact the Mayor does decide to run in '012 (for President, I' saying), AND he's polling in the low to mid 30s, I WILL take a good, strong look at him. I mean, what other way can I get their attention?

Respect FOR the Office? A Little Bit?

I have a guilty conscience about a great many items, folks. I'll be honest about it here; not being a good enough husband, not always being as conscientious about the environment as I could have been, etc.. But, yes, there is in fact one thing that I do feel pretty guilt-free about. I was critical but respectful to President Bush. And I've been critical but respectful to President Obama..........................................................................................I mean, sure, I was probably a little more pissed at Bush because of the war (4,400 dead, over a billion lost in expenditures) and all. But even with him, I'm saying - I tried to avoid the hyperbole and, yes, I even defended him against such hyperbole.....Now, as far as that idiot, Sarah Palin, goes.....I'm kidding!!!...........................................................................................Seriously, though, don't you folks think that it's significantly well past the time that we started putting this Nazi stuff away - and even the socialism label, too? Yes, President Obama has proven to be a fairly big government Democrat (some of his "accomplishments" have even made me leery). But he hasn't done anything that hasn't been tried before - stuff, folks, that even the Republicans have toyed with (Nixon and Romney with health insurance, for example). In my opinion here, the fellow's at least a notch or two to the right of Lenin.

Any Enemy of Cable Lunacy is a....

One of my journalistic heroes is Baltimore Sun media analyst, David Zurawick. I personally find the fellow to be smart, concise, and, yes, for my money, easily one of (along with CNN's and the Washington Post's Howie Kurtz) the least partisan writers/talking-heads out there. But, I'm telling you, the real reason that I dig him is this. He is, as far as I can tell, the only person out there who's been on BOTH Keith Olbermann's worst person list AND Bill O'Reilly's pinheads and patriots segment (on the pinhead side", I'm saying). That, to me/more than anything, speaks volumes about the fellow.....................................................................................................P.S. He was also called a right-winger by Olbermann and a left-winger by O'Reilly. Just for the record (though, yeah, you had probably already figured that out already, huh?).

At the Risk of Being Referred to (By Slade Leeds) as a Systematizer

I submit to you folks the following - categories of U.S. citizens/voters - this, as determined by their "relationship" to President Obama: A) People who flat-out think that Obama has done a boffo job and that his philosophy has been AOK. B) People who think that the President has been far too liberal (other, significantly less benign, terms have included extreme, radical, socialistic - anti-American, even). C) People who think that the President hasn't been liberal/progressive enough, that he's clearly spent far too much time trying to woo Republicans, independents, Whigs (I'm kidding) etc.. D) People who think that the President has basically been a decent guy, but one who clearly hasn't lived up to the hype. They don't necessarily think that the problem, however, has been one of "too liberal" or "too conservative", but rather one of weak leadership, questionable judgement, etc.. I guess that, yeah, you could probably put me into this category.

Bias on Bias

Sean Hannity has this weekly segment called, "The Media Mash". In it, he and The Media Research Center's, Brent Bozell (wouldn't you just love to go upside this individual's head a few times?), do a rundown of supposed liberal media bias for the previous week. And while, yes, I actually do have a tendency to agree with Mr. Hannity that the "mainstream media" does in fact tend to tilt to the left (no, not to the degree that he and Mr. O'Reilly say but, still, yes, somewhat), some of the examples that he gives of this bias are patently bogus, to say the least............................................................................................For instance, get this. In a recent clip of NBC's/MSNBC's, Chuck Todd, he shows Mr. Todd saying that the election of 2008 was about "hope" and that the election of 2010 is about "fear". Of course, what he doesn't emphasize is the fact that Mr. Todd was admonishing BOTH PARTIES for their fear-mongering, NOT JUST THE REPUBLICANS. It was, folks, typical frigging Hannity.....Now, if you aren't exactly paying close attention to...../........................................................................................................P.S. Just to be fair and balanced here, MSNBC at night hasn't exactly been a glimmering beacon of veracity, either. Tonight, just for example, Rachel Maddow kept on referring to the Arizona immigration law as an "anti-immigration law". Couple that with the fact that Olbermann never even uses the term, "illegal immigrant" (he prefers the much more politically correct term, "undocumented worker") and, yeah, shit like that, I'm saying.

Justine Henin's (One-Handed) Backhand

What would be my answer to the question, "So, what do you think is the most beautiful shot in the history of tennis?"