Sorry, They Weren't Heroes

It’s been a couple weeks since the Virginia Tech massacre. I had this thought some time back, but resisted putting it down into words until tonight. No reason, just finally got to it.

Why were the flags at half mast for the victims of this shooting? I’m not insensitive to what happened, it was an awful tragedy. But if we are going to fly flags at half mast for these “heroes,” then using that rationale, why are we not flying flags at half mast for each and every one of those soldiers slain overseas in that lie called the war in Iraq. In fact, why haven’t we been flying flags at half mast for the duration of this god-damned tragedy?

I’m saddened by the loss of life at Virginia Tech. But let’s get real here. Bush ignores the realities of war overseas so as to deflect attention, but recognizes tragedy in our midst because it can be used as ammunition by scumbags like Newt Gingrich to blame liberals.

Another Not So Very Christian Christian

Working for Change

Blog Summit 2007

I met Mike Mathias (Pundit Nation), James Wigderson (Wigderson Library and Pub) at the Starbucks on 16th and Wisconsin. James got his exercise in early by walking to the wrong Starbucks at 6th and Wisconsin, and then bravely hiking back up Wisconsin to our location. That he made it unscathed says something about goings on east of 124th Street.

Seriously, it was good to see Mike (only the second time in 19 some years) and James (first time in 19 some years). Mike, James and I were contemporaries at UWM. Mike and I wrote together for the UWM Post, while James was involved with the UWM Times, which I think is now defunct, not sure. Though tensions often were high between the opposing political camps at UWM, I’d like to think that Mike, James and I kept it a little more real than some of the others.

Anyway, we made our way to the event and following are some thoughts:

James made it walking up three flights of stairs to the event. Way to go!

I enjoyed meeting Owen Robinson (Boots and Sabers). Owen is a current West Bend resident, which happens to be where I grew up, went to high school, etc. I listened to Owen and was impressed by his speaking ability, and that though he is as partisan as they come, he came down squarely on the side of all bloggers, defending their rights to have a voice. However, his analysis of Eugene Kane was waaaay off. I liked Kane. The first time I ever met him, though I did not have an opportunity to talk with him. I liked him because he was unapologetic and spoke his mind. Apparently speaking ones mind is only relegated to conservative speech according to some conservatives.

I met Dave Casper (Ask Me Later) and Aaron Kreel (Subject To Change), two other conservative bloggers, and liked them immediately. I didn’t get much chance to speak with Dave, but our shared thoughts about Ms McBride are enough to acknowledge him as a kindred spirit, if not ideologically. Aaron is a nice guy. He showed me pictures of his newborn. Very cute kiddo. I wish him the best.

I also saw Phelony Jones (The Confidentials) from a distance. She looked, as she is wont to say, very sassy. Unfortunately for us (or wisely) she left the proceedings early.

I also had brief conversations with Patrick of Badger Blogger, Tom McMahon and Dean Mundy. All pretty decent people … for conservatives (just kidding, guys). I have to agree with Owen on this, I find myself liking a number of conservative bloggers (though I suspect if I had met Fred Dooley, my opinion of him would not change).

Oh, and Brian Fraley (Daily Takes) had nothing to say but tired clichés. He is a wiener.

And Jessica McBride is as annoying in person as she is in print and/or on the radio. She attempted to make a point about blogger diversity by pointing out conservatives were bloggers and … could you believe it, conservative women. Now, this is true, but she followed that up by stressing it this way (paraphrasing) … “can you believe it, a conservative woman” (referring to herself and just herself). Mike Plaisted came over later and said he liked the t-shirts I had made for Ms McBride’s benefit. He then pointed out her silliness (kind way to say she’s an obnoxious b—tch). I agreed, and said I had almost raised my hand to ask her if it was always about her … but in the interest of decorum had decided not to.

Anyway, she’s a wiener, too.

I also was glad to meet the aforementioned Plaisted, Sean Hackbarth (American Mind) and Cory Liebman, whose blog I have admired. I also spoke at length with Bert, a contributor at folkbum. He was ten years a reporter. I didn’t ask where. I should have. And, I got to share a moment with Renee Crawford. I liked her.

All in all, it was a pretty good time and I have to admit, I agreed with Charlie Sykes (just a couple times.)

Lastly, where was dad29? I would really like to have met him. And where was my erstwhile buddy, Chris of Spotted Horse fame? Oh well, one can’t have everything all the time.

McBride, Again

Jessica McBride wants us to look at this paragraph.

MADISON, Wis. Republican legislative leaders asked Attorney General J-B Van Hollen today for his opinion on how a U-S Supreme Court decision might affect the state's ban on a procedure critics call partial-birth abortion.

She has this to say about that paragraph.

Let's see. Babies are partially born before they are killed in the procedure. Sounds like a factually-based description to me.

For our factually challenged quasi-journalist let’s clear this up: The actual name for the procedure is “intact dilation and evacuation.” The paragraph clearly states that critics, that is anti-abortion supporters, call the procedure partial birth abortion. News organizations are under no obligation to use the intentionally-created term designed to fool the foolish into voting against this medically sound and rarely used procedure, regardless of how the Supreme Court ruled.


Also posted at Whallah!

Go get a doggy bag and pick up your crap, Ms McBride.

McIlheran: Favors White Supremacists?

This is just a quick note about a blog post by Patrick McIlheran (already well-covered by Bert at folkbum). David Gaubatz, the fellow that Melanie Phillips and McIlheran rely on for the breaking news on WMDs is a member of a fascinating group that believes in wonderful, pro-American ideals like this (by way of Glenn Greenwald, h/t Bert):

White Christians were at the founding of this nation a distinct people and privileged as such. Men of means among this people were given the opportunity for representative government. This is, for those of you flinching, not a thesis or “viewpoint”; this is historical fact.

After the Civil War, this changed; with the move into the 20th century this change became a wholesale reformation. Today, you cannot speak of Christianity in the public sphere and if you mention “white” and “Christians” in the same sentence you will be set upon as a despicable racist by every “fair-minded” public person. And, this phenomenon extends far beyond race.

Then this:

It was of course the beloved Ronald Reagan, the David of conservatism against the Goliath of Liberalism, who was the first president in the history of the US to actually grant amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants with his support of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. And before that, it was the Great Society’s Lyndon B. Johnson who passed the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which eliminated nation-specific quotas, replacing them with just one overall quota. This meant of course that we had as a country effectively determined that we were not a white Christian nation, but would become a brownish-black nation of third world types who could barely speak our language, knew nothing of our culture and civilization, and indeed desired to be one of “us” predominantly for economic reasons.

And this:

Immigration is now at the front lines in the battle for America's national existence. Under assault by the Left, including the Libertarians, the fact that America was founded and made strong by immigrants from western European countries with Judeo-Christian roots is no longer part of the modern immigration "debate." The only question now is how do you secure your borders and establish the necessary factors for "assimilation." This "debate" of course ignores the most fundamental fact: is there not something unique about American national existence that is directly related to the fact that it was founded by white, mostly anglo-saxon, believing Christians? Does the modern charge of "racism" now preclude the observation and analysis of this fact?

McIlheran's friend Gaubatz is currently engaged in mapping every mosque and Islamic day school in America, attempting to come up with a “threat” picture.

I knew McIlheran was whacky. Who would have thought he had such weird fellow-travelers … well, easy to believe actually.

Back At It Again

Patrick McIlheran is at it again. At least he is consistent. Now he’s got a piece claiming the environment is not as bad as those nasty scientists say it is. Everyone has an opinion on this and that’s okay. It’s just that McIlheran keeps trotting out these conservative think tank groups that have a vested interest in saying everything is peachy keen, to back up his assertions, rather than use real science. For example:

American Enterprise Institute: The American Enterprise Institute is a neoconservative think tank, AEI has emerged as one of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy. (Wikipedia)

Pacific Research Institute: Another think tank, which has been closely associated with the American Enterprise Institute. (SourceWatch)

Steven Hayward: Hayward studies the environment, law, political economy, and the presidency. He is author of the annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, published jointly by the American Enterprise Institute and the Pacific Research Institute. Hayward writes AEI's Environmental Policy Outlook and also recently authored The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980 (American Enterprise Institute).

Ah, a scientist devoted to the environment, NOT!

Look, McIlheran does point out that this is a different point of view. But, why oh why does he continue to abuse the intelligence of those who read his tripe. Just come out and admit it, Paddy, you don’t have a clue what you are writing about … you just do it to piss off the other half of the people who read your columns and blog entries, the ones who don’t take your writings at face value.

McBride Fails Again

I stopped today at the gas station around the corner to pick up some ice for the celebration of spring barbeque we were having. A young friend of mine was working. He is in his senior year at UWM, is an honor student and will be moving onto law school next year where, I am sure, he will succeed. Anyway, he told me that I would be amused by this story.

He said he was driving home one night and happened to be listening to Jessica McBride's show. She was talking about the Virginia Tech murder spree and apparently was chastising the school for not having closed the campus the next few days after. My friend decided to call in. The screener/producer answered the phone and asked what topic he wanted to talk to Jessica about. My friend said he wanted to discuss the school closing issue because he disagreed with Ms McBride. The screen said thank you and hung up.

It’s typical of wing-nut talk show hosts; especially McBride. She won't take on anyone who can match or exceed her intelligence (nearly everyone), but will wait for that stray idiot just so she can claim later how she was able to "smack" down another liberal.

McBride, Again

Another example of why Jessica McBride is the fruitiest of the fruit loops in the wing-nut world. On her blog Thursday, she tried to say that Joe Biden was inarticulate. Here is what she had to say.

"Guess he's an inarticulate as Obama.

By the way, only Democrats could get away with blaming a non-conservative talk show host's problems on conservatives. And exploiting Virginia Tech."

What a clueless wonkette!

ADDENDUM
A friend of mine pointed out that this post was a wee bit ambiguous. Looking back at it, I had to agree. I have not been applying much energy into blogging with the arrival of my daughter, but that is not an excuse for putting out sloppy efforts.

I was trying to point out McBride’s hypocrisy in pointing out that Joe Biden seemed to have an inarticulate moment during a speech (leaving aside that a written report cannot possibly duplicate how a speech sounds). Considering she is an ardent defender of Mr. Language-Mangler himself, her response, which I highlighted above, was hilarious.

Remember, she is a “professional” journalist. Why does UWM continue to provide a position for this woman? She embodies everything that is wrong with journalism today, and I am not just focusing on Faux News.

My Soda Has Zero Calories ... Nyah Nyah Nyah

I was heading back home from having picked up some goods at the local Pick n’ Save. Turned on the radio thinking I might catch the Brewers/Cardinals game and was shocked to hear the unmistakably shrill voice of Jessica McBride. Damn, rain delay.

So, I listened a bit, hard though it was on my ears. She was talking about State Senator Ted Kanavas’ gimmick of highlighting 30 different tax or fee increases during the month of April. All right, I thought. Big deal … I do like to know where my money is being spent, though I’m less needy than my conservative brethren ... so I decided to listen until I got home.

Apparently today, Kanavas highlighted a 2 cent increase on the cost of each can of soda … the revenue, estimated to be about $70 million, to be directed to a trust fund used to increase dental reimbursement rates.

I was turning into the driveway when Jessica started in on this, so wanting to hear what she would end up saying about the increase, I waited to turn the car off. She concluded by saying (paraphrasing) “I drink Coke Zero. There are no calories in Coke Zero. So I don’t want to have to pay for dental reimbursement for the poor because my soda doesn’t contribute to cavities.”

Two things struck me as odd about this.:

One: McBride must really dislike those less fortunate than her because she sure jumped on them pretty quickly. In fact, no where in Mr. Kanavas’ spiel was anything mentioned about the reimbursement being strictly for the poor.

Two: Calories have nothing to do with tooth decay.

Is McBride really this dumb?

(fyi: Diet colas don't contain sugars that cause tooth decay but they contain phosphoric acid. Acids can cause erosion in teeth. It’s different from decay, but can be just as bad. On the other hand, Coke Zero does contain aspartame, which some have linked to brain cancer. If true, that would explain much about McBride.)

Kurt Vonnegut

I was saddened to read that a childhood companion of mine, Kurt Vonnegut, has died at the age of 84, presumably of brain injuries suffered during a fall. I say a childhood friend because I remember reading "Player Piano" the first time just about the time I entered high school. Afterward, I read everything I could get my hands on written by Vonnegut. Vonnegut pushed the envelope ...

"He was a man who combined a wicked sense of humor and sort of steady moral compass, who was always sort of looking at the big picture of the things that were most important," said Joel Bleifuss, editor of In These Times, a liberal magazine based in Chicago that featured Vonnegut articles.

Some of Vonnegut's books were banned and burned for alleged obscenity. He took on censorship as an active member of the PEN writers' aid group and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The American Humanist Association, which promotes individual freedom, rational thought and scientific skepticism, made him its honorary president.

I hope in my life I can look back and know I rocked the boat just a bit and caused just a little uncomfortableness like Vonnegut did.


I really wonder what gives us the right to wreck this poor planet of ours. -- Kurt Vonnegut

Whallah!

I was considering keeping this secret, but then decided there was no point. I am going to have a t-shirt made with the word "Whallah" emblazoned across the chest in honor of our journalist wanna-be, Jessica McBride. If anyone is interested in their own t-shirt, either reply here or send me a note via e-mail (piratebat@wi.rr.com). Include size specs.

While I'm not too worried about the cost, some help will be appreciated. I will post the cost later after determining what it will be. Deadline for letting me know is next week Friday, April 20.

No Outrage

The price of gas hit $2.89 at the station around the corner. I asked the clerk inside if she had been getting complaints about the price and she said no. Has anyone else noticed the lack of outrage.

I remember just before the election how this was an issue guaranteed to inflame tempers. My only conclusion is that elections, that centerpiece of our democracy that should bring out the best in Americans, brings out the worst.

Daddy/Daughter Night Out

My youngest sister was lucky enough to come into four Admirals tickets for Friday night's game. She had one ticket to spare (she was going with her two boys) and asked if my son Ian would like to join them. Of course he jumped at the chance.

Unfortunately, this left out his younger sister, six-year old Abby. Well, daddy being free as well, he invited his beautiful daughter to join him for a dinner date at Pepinos. Abby took a bath. Kelly dried her hair and helped her get ready and when she was, she was even more astoundingly beautiful. I'm such a lucky dad.

I was very proud of Abby throughout dinner (which also included shakes from Culvers later). She was on her best manners. She said thank you, excuse me and please when appropriate. She did not interrupt the waiter while he was talking and was the perfect dinner guest.

I'll bet the other patrons saw how proud Abby's dada was of her.

A Quiet Morning

It's a quiet morning ... the children are downstairs with their cousins Kiefer and Keaton. There has been only one difference of opinion, solved by bringing an extra blanket and pillow. The baby still sleeps though a few gurgles were heard through the baby monitor. Mom is sleeping as well, enjoying her day off - part of her part time work schedule.

Me? I've been involved in a free agency draft for one of the fantasy leagues I am in ... this one for which my team is the defending champion. It will be a one-year reign as the team has already been dissassembled, ala the Florida Marlins.

Bopping around the Internet, I saw this quote:

"Other than telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, now, die, I think the Republicans have done a fine job of getting government out of our personal lives." -- Sunday Portland Oregonian

Hypocrites.

I had been having discussions with a fellow named Tracy over at Boots and Sabers. We had been discussing speech and its limits. He is of the belief that pornography, abortion, etc. are all liberal inventions. Since the founding fathers envisioned the 1st Amendment to be a protection only for political speech, he said, anything else is a liberal assault on the true meaning of this amendment (paraphrasing).

Folkbum and Scott Feldstein joined in the fray ... all of us amazed at the shortsightedness of this fellow. No one I know likes pornography. It is a disgusting abuse of the human spirit. Of course, Tracy could not look past the child pornographers he apparently sees around every corner, courtesy of liberal thought. I wonder if he has ever given thought to the manipulated women and what circumstances caused themselves to expose their souls in such a hard and unsavory manner.

Yet, for all its inherent evil, the right to publish this crap is enshrined in the 1st Amendment. Because, if this was banned, what would be next?

Modeling for art classes? (And then next, government-sponsored art).
Erotic speech. Would Giacomo Casanova be banned.
Art literature magazines.
Magazines with erotic poetry.
Just modeling.
All non-government magazines.
All speech (unless approved).

It's not a complete slippery-slope list, but I hope you get the idea. There are laws to combat predators. Let the police do their job. Communities have the right to deny pornographers residency. The Internet presents a unique challenge. But I've got news for you, Tracy. There were child pornographers before the Internet and access to this trash can be purchased anywhere.

We need to be very cautious regarding any chipping away at our freedoms. Unfortunately, this adminstration and its many followers, like Tracy, are only too glad to wield a chisel.

Meanwhile, the children blissfully play in the basement and watch the Cartoon Network ... and the baby and her mommy sleep soundly upstairs. There is still much good in this world.

Happy Easter

Limbaugh Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize?

This was too funny. Media Matters reports that:

On the March 30 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, after noting that Ole Danbolt Mjos, the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize committee, reportedly "praise[d]" former Vice President Al Gore's efforts to draw attention to global warming, Rush Limbaugh declared: "I don't even know why Gore's qualified for this. ... I have done more for world peace to promote liberty and freedom than Al Gore has."

Limbaugh stated that he is "an accredited nominee this year for the Nobel Peace Prize" and asserted that it was "cheap" that "Gore's over there" in Norway "lobbying" for the award. He later said: "My lawyers at the Landmark Legal Foundation are looking into the possibility of filing an objection with the Nobel committee over the unethical tampering for this award that Al Gore is engaging in." In fact, according to a February 22 Associated Press report, Limbaugh's "nomination" by the Landmark Legal Foundation "appeared to" be "invalid" because the foundation may not have "nomination rights."

According to a March 29 Reuters article, Mjos attended a March 29 speech by Gore in Oslo, Norway, and afterwards "prais[ed]" Gore for advancing a "very important message" on the threat posed by rising global temperatures. Referring to the report, Limbaugh claimed: "Gore's over there lobbying. That's cheap. You're not supposed to lobby for this thing. You're supposed to have dignity. You're supposed to sit back there and let the selection process take its course." Limbaugh then offered himself as a contrast to Gore: "I'm not over there speaking to these people about anything" and asked: "What in the hell's global warming have to do with world peace?"

FYI: The president of the Landmark Legal Foundation is Mark Levin, a man who is nearly as outrageous as Michael (Weiner) Savage. Obviously, an institution with the merit to nominate Limbaugh … good grief.

The following was a response from a commenter anonymously named Neondesert at Media Matters. I thought it funny.

Dammed straight. I doubt anyone is more deserving of the award. His treatment of MS sufferers as equals by making fun of them just like anybody else is only scraping the surface.

Surely no one would deny that his promotion of his latino cleaning lady to the level of free-market pharmacist gives hope worldwide to minorities.

His efforts to keep Donovan McNabb from becoming a tool of the elitist media illustrates his dedication to blacks.

And nothing could indicate his desire for commerce in other countries more than spreading his personal fortune among the young adult boys in the Dominican Republic.

These constitute merely a snapshot of the good that Rush has done to promote peace in the world, I'm sure there are many more examples. Al Gore couldn't put together a resume that would even remotely equal that of Rush.

McIlheran Strikes Out Again

Pat McIlheran is such a putz. His post last night regarding “nasty campaigning” is just too funny, and misleading. The Journal Sentinel, he reports, sent a “cease and desist” letter” to the Linda Clifford campaign because a few people became confused thinking the newspaper was calling voters. Of course, if these people had not followed their natural inclination to hang up on all outside phone calls not made by families and friends, they would have discovered that the Clifford campaign clearly identified itself at the end of the message. Not enough for McIlheran who calls them to the front of the class for their "confusing" deception.

Of course, this minor transgression (if one) is far more serious than insinuating that Linda Clifford is somehow dirty … what was that line about “immigration lawyer?” Nothing like confusing the issue and piling on racist innuendo in support of your client. But I guess that’s okay in the beady eyes of McIlheran.

And then there is the “professional dirt digger” caper. We know that Republicans would never stoop that low to accommodate what is, truly, the reality of today’s political campaigns. Oh, wait … there is a professional dirt digger for Ziegler. His name is McIlheran. Evens.

And last, and least is the laughable accusation regarding the photographers who lied about their true mission. They should not have. But compared to breaking rules that govern the judiciary (Annette Ziegler did this), and finding it easy in her heart to sentence real sexual predators to incredibly lenient sentences (Annette Ziegler did this), lying about taking photos (Linda Clifford did not do this) is kind of silly.

Speaking of photos, wasn’t it Annette Ziegler who first played “catch me lying if you can” early in the campaign with her photos in front of courthouses around the state?

McIlheran, give it a rest, but thanks for the laugh. Oh, by the way, what is it with the brown sportscoat and red tie? Channeling Ernst Röhm?

Life at the End of the Universe

h/t Aaron at Subject to Change.


I got my name in lights with notcelebrity.co.uk

Iraq 101

See how much you know about the conflict in Iraq by enrolling in Iraq 101, hosted by Mother Jones. I got nine correct out of 15 questions.

I was truly astounded by the answers to questions five and eight (I answered eight correctly). Let me say this about the answer to eight, it does say much about the arrogance of our government leaders to think the number quoted is sufficient.

Though in Jessica McBride’s jaundiced eyes, it’s probably too much. Btw: Last night on her show she advocated for first use of our nuclear arsenal vs. Iran. I believe her response was, “I can live with this.”

She was shallow as a liberal, she's downright scary as a wing-nut.

Those Darn Black People

I don’t recall any outrage pouring out from the wing-nut talking heads when this killing occurred. FYI: This guy was white.

The 24-year-old Milwaukee man who admitted killing a college student and Jimmy John's delivery driver last fall pleaded guilty today to felonies that carry a maximum possible sentence of 263 years in prison.

Prosecutors agreed to reduce the first-degree intentional homicide charge against Michael R. Green, of the 2000 block of S. 16th St., to first-degree reckless homicide in exchange for Green pleading guilty to shooting Joseph Munz, 21, to death while Munz was delivering food in the Riverwest neighborhood Oct. 10.

Green also pleaded guilty to nine other felony counts, mostly relating to a string of armed robberies he admitted to police, and prosecutors agreed to recommend he spend 60 years in prison.


Speaking of wing-nuts … they must collaborate on their own internal SE Wiscosnin talking points memos. This non-story happened some time ago. It was published in Frontline Pravda, er Milwaukee ... you know, UWM's version of Faux News on-line. The one produced by Jessica McBride, who also happens to be responsible for all content. Nothing like teaching the kiddies how not to think for themselves.

Anyway, the story, which was written ostensibly by Rebecca Kontowicz (though the style was strikingly sophomoric, like McBride's) had to do with some hoodlums, who happened to be black, wreaking havoc around the UWM campus. Ms Kontowicz complained that the JournalSentinel did not identify the hoodlums as black, thereby doing a disservice.

UPDATE: Well not really. The rest of this item disappeared ... probably my ineptitude. I was going to say that both Charlie Sykes and Patrick McIlheran linked to this article approvingly.

The problem with all this, which will never be answered ... did Kontowicz look to see if there were any instances where white lawbreakers were not identified by race, or are blacks the only ones she is concerned with? Hmmm. She's learning from the best race-baiters around.

More Happy Birthday

Can't help it. More pics of the baby.

















Oh, my 11-year old boy, Ian, went on his first date. I won't post a picture of the twosome because I did not get permission for the girl. The dance was held for 4K through 6th grade kids ... to attend, a parent had to chaperone. I was the honored one and thoroughly enjoyed watching all the kids. Thye had a DJ and fun things for the kids to do. Ian and his date did not dance, but it was fun to watch as they made sugar castles (pixie stick stuff) together ... and in general had a good time together. At the end of the night I could tell that the young lady had a good time because she tried to kick Ian in the shin. True love.


Abby, meanwhile, is quite the little 5K genius, or so her teacher implies. She loves school and actually creates her own homework when she gets home, just like her big brother.

Happy Birthday

Little Quin is three months old today. Isn't she cute!

To Err is Human ...

Tom Tomorrow

The More They Open Their Mouths ... the More Obvious Their Disdain for Humanity Becomes

For Jessica McBride, Charlie Sykes, Peter DiGaudio and all the other short-sighted right-wing individuals who think that David Ehrenstein’s op-ed about Barack Obama – the “Magic Negro” – now gives you license to expose your racist hearts with impunity (oooh, the naughty left said it first), here is a comment from a fellow anonymously named “Fabtemp” at Media Matters for America (you know, the scholarly site, not the blogsite authored by the woman named McBride who poses as a scholar). It's about Rush Limbaugh's new found playground word that he has claimed he will continue to use it until someone says it originated with him ... thereby, and only in his twisted mind, confirming that it's all about him.

Wow, Rush! Are you surprised that you found an LA Times editorialist who is only slightly less racist than you are?

The "Magic Negro" is a denigrating term for a two dimensional character so often used in film stories. He is never allowed to be a "real" person with fears, weaknesses, psychological complexities or even much of a personal history. He has counter parts in the "Magic Asian Master" and the "Magic Gay Man".

If you wish to see a form rebellion against the "Magic Negro", watch films in which Denzel Washington wanted to be a part. He's made a career out of avoiding playing the "Magic Negro", routinely choosing instead rather complex characters, some with extraordinary personal flaws like homophobia, alcoholism and even sublimated socipathology.

Ehrenstein, of course, confuses film story lines with real life. What he perceives to be some sort of "mystification" of Barack Obama is racist in its perception already. Obama is not an angry, black man shouting colorful speeches about civil rights. He's a polished son of academia who rose to the position of United States Senator - not social issue gadfly.

As Chris Rock would mock about what was so often coined about Colin Powell "What do you EXPECT the man to sound like???"

It's Ehrenstein who has the problem of seeing Barack Obama as "real", not the Dem voters supportive of his candidacy.

And here you come, Rush, gleefully happy that someone you think is "on the left" (BTW, Would that be because of Ehrenstein's previous columns, his paper or his surname? Perhaps all three?), legitimizing your repeat of "Magic Negro" like a three year old who has learned a new "bad word" to gain attention from his parents.

You and your grazing herd will never quite understand the CRITIQUE inherent in the creation of the "Magic Negro" character in story lines and how inherently OFFENSIVE a character he is. All you want is the legitimacy to scream what you think is an offensive, racism term - because you needed some "leftist" permission to do so.

So scream it all you want to your beer-swilling, dashboard fist pounding, insecure legions. Barack Obama and his supporters aren't paying attention to either YOU or the soft bigotry contained in Ehrenstein's column.

Those who pay attention to racist stereotypes in American media were already well aware that "Hollywood" ain't exactly a factory in which true social equality dreams are made. Only you people look to "Hollywood" as some representation of "liberal" thought.

Are you SURE it's not about the surnames, Rush?

Would Judge Ziegler Have Recused Herself Considering ...

I should have pursued the law. Sent to me by my sister, Kate.

JCW INVESTMENTS, INC., d/b/a Tekky Toys, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NOVELTY, INC., Defendant-Appellant. Before MANION, WOOD, and EVANS, Circuit Judges. WOOD, Circuit Judge.

Meet Pull My Finger® Fred. He is a white, middle-aged, overweight man with black hair and a receding hairline, sitting in an armchair wearing a white tank top and blue pants. Fred is a plush doll and when one squeezes Fred’s extended finger on his right hand, he farts. He also makes somewhat crude, somewhat funny statements about the bodily noises he emits, such as “Did somebody step on a duck?” or “Silent but deadly.”

Fartman could be Fred’s twin. Fartman, also a plush doll, is a white, middle-aged, overweight man with black hair and a receding hairline, sitting in an armchair wearing a white tank top and blue pants. Fartman (as his name suggests) also farts when one squeezes his extended finger; he too cracks jokes about the bodily function.

Two of Fartman’s seven jokes are the same as two of the 10 spoken by Fred. Needless to say, Tekky Toys, which manufactures Fred, was not happy when Novelty, Inc., began producing Fartman, nor about Novelty’s production of a farting Santa doll sold under the name Pull-My- Finger Santa. Tekky sued for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and unfair competition and eventually won on all claims.

The district court awarded $116,000 based on lost profits resulting from the copyright infringement, $125,000 in lost profits attributable to trademark infringement, and $50,000 in punitive damages based on state unfair competition law. The district court then awarded Tekky $575,099.82 in attorneys’ fees.

On appeal, Novelty offers a number of arguments for why it should not be held liable for copyright infringement, argues that Illinois’s punitive damages remedy for unfair competition is preempted by federal law, and contends that the attorneys’ fees awarded by the district court should have been capped according to Tekky’s contingent-fee arrangement with its attorneys.

For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

Somewhat to our surprise, it turns out that there is a niche market for farting dolls, and it is quite lucrative.

Geez!

Just wanted to echo Jay Bullock’s comments over at folkbum’s rambles and rants. The incident at the Army recruiting center is deplorable. I hope the perpetrators are caught and they spend some serious time for their stupid, inane actions. The only thing they have accomplished is to besmirch those who protested this illegal war with compassion, honor and respect.

Having said that, another prediction is coming true that the wing-nuts would be jumping all over this. Charlie Sykes used the phrase “well-coordinated” four times during the short amount of time I actually was able to listen this morning … this phrase obviously designed to give the impression that this kind of behavior is breaking out all over the country in perfect synchronicity. It’s not, by the way.

What is really well-coordinated is the constant assault of the right-wing noise machine (and their blogger sycophants) as they spread the verbal equivalent of human feces on the airwaves.

Operation Rewrite History a Success

From Jonathan Schwartz:

Four Years Ago
THE PRESIDENT: My fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.

Today
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Four years ago today, coalition forces launched Operation Iraqi Freedom to remove Saddam Hussein from power. They did so to eliminate the threat his regime posed to the Middle East and to the world. Coalition forces carried out that mission with great courage and skill…

Who's on First?

An explanation to my son ... Why did we invade Iraq (from my mom, again):

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq ?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction.

Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.

Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq ?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.

Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons of mass destruction, did we? A: That's because the weapons were so well hidden.

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.

Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons.

Q: That doesn't make sense. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons with which they could have fought back?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it ok to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.

Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.

Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is a Communist country.

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until they stopped being Communists and started being Capitalists like us.

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans become Capitalists?
A: Don't be a smart-ass.

Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.

Q: Kind of like in China?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein came to power through military coups, so they're not really legitimate leaders anyway.

Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in theUnited States.

Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.

Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.

Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.

Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.

Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men, fifteen of them Saudi Arabians, hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 Americans.

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.

Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamists who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women too.

Q: Didn't the Bush Administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people ware caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It's ok with us if radical Islamist fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off people's hands for stealing bread.

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic bodycovering.

Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers.

Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia .
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan .

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the Mujahedeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the evil Communist empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and Capitalism like us. We call them Russians now.

Q: So the Soviets, I mean, the Russians, are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq , so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn't help us invade Iraq either.

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to re-name French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.

Q: Do we always re-name foods whenever another country doesn't do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.

Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah, for a while.

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.

Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yes, but we looked the other way, to show him we were his friends.

Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all the better.

Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.

Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A: Yes! You finally understand how the world works. Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable and go to sleep. Good night.

Good night, Daddy.

More Gingrich Absurdity

A little more in-depth information regarding the darling of the right, the “intellectual,” Newt Gingrich. Here's a summary of Gingrich's family life, from Scoobie Davis):

1) Gingrich marries his high school teacher, Jackie, who was seven years his senior.
2) Jackie puts Gingrich through college and she works hard to get him elected to the House in 1978 (Gingrich won partly because his campaign claimed that his Democratic opponent would neglect her family if elected -- at that time it was common knowledge that Gingrich was straying).
3) Shortly after being elected, Gingrich separated from his wife -- announcing the separation in the hospital room where Jackie was recovering from cancer surgery (the divorce was final in 1981); Jackie Gingrich and her children had to depend on alms from her church because Gingrich didn't pay any child support.
4) Six months after the divorce, Gingrich, then 38, married Marianne Ginther, 30.
5) "In May 1999, however, Gingrich [55] called Marianne [48] at her mother's home. After wishing the 84-year-old matriarch happy birthday, he told Marianne that he wanted a divorce." This was eight months after Marianne was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.
6) In 2000, Gingrich, 57, married ex-congressional aide Callista Bisek, 34 (kind of like an intern ... my comment), with whom he was having a relationship while married to Marianne.

Bill Clinton was wrong to philander about, and he should have had more sense than to fool around with an intern. But two things need to be said: Clinton’s perjury had to do with being reticent about admitting a sexual tryst … hardly something that would bring down a nation, and, truthfully, it was just an attempt to smear and embarrass Clinton. Conservatives should really look at themselves before making their stupid claims of hatred of Bush.

Nothing Bill Clinton did compares in banality and pure evil than what Gingrich did to his women. The man is a pig.

Actual Writings From Hospital Charts

More from my Mother. She's so cool.

The patient refused autopsy.
The patient has no previous history of suicides.
Patient has left white blood cells at another hospital.
Note: Patient here recovering from forehead cut.
Patient became very angry when given an enema by mistake.
Patient has chest pain if she lies on her left side for over a year.
On the second day the knee was better, and on the third day it disappeared.
The patient is tearful and crying constantly. She also appears to be depressed.
The patient has been depressed since she began seeing me in 1993.
Discharge status: Alive but without permission.
Healthy appearing decrepit 69-year old male, mentally alert but forgetful.
Patient had waffles for breakfast and anorexia for lunch.
She is numb from her toes down.
While in ER, she was examined, x-rated and sent home.
The skin was moist and dry.
Occasional, constant infrequent headaches.
Patient was alert and unresponsive.
Rectal examination revealed a normal size thyroid.
She stated that she had been constipated for most of her life, until she got a divorce.
I saw your patient today, who is still under our car for physical therapy.
The lab test indicated abnormal lover function.
Skin: Somewhat pale but present.
Patient has two teenage children, but no other abnormalities.

An Angry Lefty for One Day

I’m just angry today. Yep, I’m an angry person today and I am a liberal so … viola … I’m a member of the angry left … today.

My good friend and blogging buddy, James Wigderson, author of Wigderson Library and Pub (which is a very fine blog) annoyed me yesterday and today (perhaps it was his intention) with his rant about the right needing to reach for a higher standard … a standard higher than liberal offensive speech … and his off-handed defense of Newt Gingrich's indiscretions.

I was flabbergasted at both the audacity and sagaciousness of his posts. Flabbergasted at the audacity because, other than some punks out in blogger land who write some truly offensive things about the President, who say offensive things about the vice president … you know, ordinary citizens who admittedly have the IQs of mice … it’s conservatives who dominate the mean-spirited end of the free speech spectrum. I’ve documented the notorious members of this brigade of hate, so I will not repeat myself.

But, I’m also flabbergasted at his sagaciousness because … well, James would be a great speech writer. I can see the less informed members of the conservative coalition (most of them) nodding their heads in unison at his seemingly convincing words.

Tom Tomorrow covers the Coulter phenomenon well … and the fact that she does not get it. No matter how many times James and others decry Coulter, the fact is a vast majority of conservatives enjoy and support her filthy mouthings.

The mouth that roared

Coulter explains her harmless, inoffensive little joke:
Right and I suspect everyone listening to your show knows about that. I mean, I know — well, I guess Pat is out in America now; you’re primarily in New York City. I give a lot of speeches out in America, I frequently visit America, and Americans are pretty freaked out about somebody going to rehab for using a word, and that’s of course what I was referring to. And I don’t think there’s anything offensive about any variation of faggy, faggotry, faggot, fag. It’s a schoolyard taunt. It means — it means wussy. It means, you know, Hillary giving a speech in a fake Southern drawl — that’s faggy. A trial lawyer who weeps before juries is faggy. Lifetime-type TV, faggy. Everyone understood I was not literally calling — well, I was not calling — well, for one thing, I wasn’t calling John Edwards anything. That was the whole point. I couldn’t talk about him, his life’s work, his appeasement policies, his wimpiness on foreign policy, because that word is out of bounds. So, in point of fact, I called John Edwards nothing. I said I couldn’t even discuss him because using any variation of that totally excellent word would send me into rehab.

This is, of course, the woman who “jokes” about murdering New York Times reporters en masse and assassinating Supreme Court judges and Democratic Presidents. Nonetheless, I find this defense extraordinary. Up until last week, there wasn’t a person in this country who would have argued that “faggot” is just a harmless word, offensive to no one. To say that it’s just a “schoolyard taunt” — well, I spent my middle school years in the south at the height of the integration battles (America being the place where I grew up and live today, unlike Ann, who apparently views it as a foreign land she sometimes has to visit). There were plenty of “schoolyard taunts” in those days targeted toward race, far beyond the “n” word. By Ann’s logic, she should be free to use any of them in discussing Barack Obama, because they were nothing more than harmless “taunts.” Why, if she phrased the joke properly — “I can’t call Obama a —— because it would be sooooo politically incorrect, ha ha ha!” — she could even claim that she hadn’t called him anything at all.
I invite her to try.

… it’s also sad that Ann, allegedly a professional writer, can’t think of a single way to discuss her negative feelings toward a presidential candidate without using a term that is considered hateful and offensive by most rational people. Maybe she should consider another line of work.


Lastly, James posts that the media still doesn’t get it about the Clinton impeachment. I’ve already commented at James’ site … the problem is James doesn’t get it. It really is about hypocrisy … James, and Gingrich, once again use that tried and true argument called equivalency in an attempt to sway the meager minds of their audience, however, the fact is Gingrich had an affair. For him to claim to be an authority on what is moral and a value is a travesty. For him to sit in judgment of Bill Clinton is ridiculous. For James to ignore it and to twist it in a different direction is a travesty, too.

Newt Gingrich is an Offensive Person

Gingrich can claim all he wants that he is not being a hypocrite (read the article) about having had an affair while leading the charge to impeach Clinton (over dubious charges … any lie he made having nothing to do with running this country, rather sexual indiscretions with an intern) … and now admits all this with James Dobson, grupenfuhrer of Focus With the Family.

Gotta love the christian conservatives. Now Newt will be forgiven in the eyes of god and all will be good.

It's a Baby Boy

A baby boy is born to Aaron and Kelly Kreel. I know Aaron as the author of the Subject to Change blog. He is an honest, thoughtful and good guy ... for a ... father (ha, thought I'd say conservative).

Good luck, good health for the little one and a speedy recovery to Kelly.

She is so Clueless

Jessica McBride said tonight on her radio show that she would not split with her President on the war in Iraq unless the generals said it was in our national interest to lose.


Huh?

A Really Bad Joke

Another joke from my Mother.

A sperm speciment was requested of an 85-year-old man by his doctor to conduct a sperm count as part of the man's physical exam. The doctor gave the man a jar and said, "Take this jar home and bring back a semen sample tomorrow."

The next day the 85-year-old man reappeared at the doctor's office and gave him the jar, which was as clean and empty as the previous day. The doctor asked what happened and the man explained: "Well, doc, it's like this ... first I tried with my right hand, but nothing happened. Then I tried with my left hand, but still nothing. Then I asked my wife for help. She tried with her right hand, then with her left, still nothing. She tried with her mouth, first with the teeth in, then with her teeth out, still nothing. We even called up Arleen, the lady next door and she tried, too. First she tried with both hands, then an armpit. She even tried squeezin' it between her knees, but still nothing."

The doctor was shocked. "You asked your neighbor!?!?"

The old man replied, "Yep. None of us could get the jar open."

(But, what are friends for?)

High Minded Indeed

I know I’m cutting in on Mike Mathias’ (of Pundit Nation) schtick of exposing the high-minded intellectualism of some of the visitors to Owen Robinson’s Boots and Sabers site, but this comment from two-time “intellectual,” mickey, really is too good.

Regarding Ann Coulter: Mickey is right, Ann Coulter does does not represent conservatism. However, she and mickey do represent its uglier side.

Steve-zero, there is a difference between people of character like Owen, and liberal ass hats like you. Owen examines his moral conscience and chooses to suipport or not support someone based on their acts words and deeds Mental midgets like you choose your leaders based on their ideology. Ann Coulter is correct most of the time, but her “bile” as you call it, has lost her the modicum of support she recieved from the likes of Owen. Bill Clinton is a rapist, you have no problem with that. Republicans and conservatives take out their trash. Liberals get in bed with theirs. Zero, you morally bankrupt libs have a KKK WIZARD and TED KENNEDY serving you nicely. Then there’s William Jefferson.

Coulter is the Sub Conscious Right

Here’s another reason why Patrick McIlheran is irrelevant, and why the Milwaukee Wisconsin Midwest United States Western Hemisphere Planet Earth JournalSentinel should be ashamed to pay him.

He says in a blog post titled “Go Take a Nap, Ms. Coulter,” that he too has a problem with her use of the word “faggot” recently during a convention of conservative activists … of course only after seeing that others had made negative comments about her.

He hastens to add that he has found her to be a good writer, “… is often hilarious and can express a political argument incisively.” She can also be mean at times, he’s winked, but mostly she’s brilliant he’s opined, too.

I suppose these accounts, taken from a Slate Magazine article, are brilliant examples of her wittiness.

"[Clinton] masturbates in the sinks."—Rivera Live, Aug. 2, 1999

"God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.' "—Hannity & Colmes, June 20, 2001

The "backbone of the Democratic Party" is a "typical fat, implacable welfare recipient"—syndicated column, Oct. 29, 1999

To a disabled Vietnam vet: "People like you caused us to lose that war."—MSNBC, Oct. 11, 1997

"Women like Pamela Harriman and Patricia Duff are basically Anna Nicole Smith from the waist down. Let's just call it for what it is. They're whores."—Salon.com, Nov. 16, 2000

"I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote."—Hannity & Colmes, Aug. 17, 1999

"My libertarian friends are probably getting a little upset now but I think that's because they never appreciate the benefits of local fascism."—MSNBC, Feb. 8, 1997

McIlheran provides two examples of left-wing hilarity, as though that’s enough to make up for the army of talk radio, television, and blogger numskulls employed by the Rovian autocracy. His continued employment is another reason that, despite repeated calls for me to renew my subscription, I refuse to do so, relying instead on the free version on-line.

Though truth be told, I won’t be troubled if that version becomes pay-per-view. There’s are better places to receive movie time information (though I do like their baseball coverage ... Drew Olsen and Tom Haudricourt are top-notch).

Say What?

Tom Tomorrow

Loathe Thy Neighbor

Some of Jessica McBride’s friends are highlighted in this video from The Daily Show titled “Loathe Thy Neighbor.” It’s hilarious … this Craig Baker fellow is completely clueless.

Baseball is Berry Berry Good to Me

I have been playing Strat-0-Matic baseball for over twenty years now. My first entry into this hobby was as the Pittsburgh Pirates in a keeper league called the American Baseball League. Along with 23 other individuals from around the country (coast to coast) I competed in a 160 game season to see who would have the honor of making the playoffs and fighting for the ABL championship. In twelve years, my Pirates won five division titles and were the wild card participant two other times … once making it to the World Series where my team was defeated 4-2.

These type of leagues are nothing like the rotisserie leagues that are all the rage. We don’t acquire players who then accumulate points for things such as stolen bases, strikeouts, wins, losses, etc. Strat-0-Matic actually number crunches the production of a player from the previous year … batting, on base average, slugging, outfield arm and accuracy, hold ability by pitchers, defense and defensive range, and much, much more are examined, eventually resulting in a very realistic replaying ability. Albert Pujols is going to be very Albert Pujols-like in Strat-0-Matic.

Anyway, about seven years ago, I joined a new, more advanced league called BRASS League (Bloomington Rotisserie and Strat-0-Matic Society). The role of general manager was further enhanced in this game with salary structures and free agency added. Now, I had to not only field a team and play against others, I had to pay my players, as well.

Two nights ago, my current team, the Cream City Pirates, culminated its most successful BRASS season by defeating the Montreal Sunsets to advance to the World Series. In seven years, my teams have won three division titles, but never advanced this far. The game itself was played face-to-face … over the Internet. Strat has come a long way, baby. Below is the recap of what was truly a remarkable game. Enjoy.

Derek Jeter Refused to Lose
Derek Jeter simply refused to allow Cream City to lose game six of its prize fight with the Montreal Sunsets. Because of his heroics, the Cream City Pirates await the winner of the Gold League playoffs after winning the Silver League championship series four games to two.

Cream City had lost the previous game to Johann Santana 8-0 … a game in which the slumbering Montreal bats finally game to life. For four games, Cream City’s pitching staff, especially its bullpen, had shut down the vaunted Sunsets attack. Now, trailing 3-2 in the series, Daniel Valois’ crew needed only to win game six to force a deciding game … one which would feature Roger Clemens and his supernatural card on the mound.

The game started out like game five. A one-out single by Mark Ellis was followed by a titanic shot by Chipper Jones to put the Sunsets up 2-0. Still reeling from that shot, starter John Patterson fed Travis Hafner a gopher that Hafner deposited into the seats in deep, deep right center field. Now trailing 3-0, the Pirates fans were stunned and silent (as was their stricken manager).

But not for long.

Kenny Lofton led off with a sharp single to right. Lofton was unable to get a good lead, but his antics at first were enough to distract Montreal starter, Carlos Zambrano, into issuing a free pass to Derek Jeter. After a fly out by Brian Roberts, Larry Walker strode to the plate and first ball hitting, lashed a double into the right field corner. By the time Bobby Abreu could retrieve the ball two runs had crossed the plate. Richie Sexson followed with a double off the wall in left center, just eluding the glove of Jonny Gomes and the score was tied.

Patterson and Zambrano settled down until the top of the fifth. David DeJesus led off with a double. After a ground out by Greg Zaun, Bobby Abreu was intentionally walked to face Mark Ellis. Hopes for a double play ball were foiled when Ellis dropped a blooper just beyond second basemen Brian Robert’s reach into right field and Montreal regained the lead 4-3.

Chipper Jones followed with a walk to load the bases. Sensing trouble, Cream City manager, Tim Rock, brought in Justin Speier to face Travis Hafner. Speier’s specialty is facing lefties with his reverse card and true to form, he struck Hafner out. Rock then brought on Bronson Arroyo, the Pirate’s long relief man for the series. The strategy backfired though when Gomes laced a single to left scoring two. Once again the Cream City faithful were silent (the Pirate’s manager cutting off an expletive deleted just in time).

In the bottom of the sixth, Richie Sexson gave the crowd something to cheer for with a solo shot to deep left field off Zambrano. Still, the Pirates trailed 6-4 after six complete.

In the bottom of the seventh, Derek Jeter decided to take matters into his own hands. Still trailing by two, Lofton got on with another of his patented singles to right. Once again, though unable to get a lead, he was able to distract Zambrano into throwing a wild pitch. With Lofton dancing at second, Zambrano turned to face Jeter and threw him a fat one right down the middle. Jeter took him deep to left center. The crowd roared its approval … the game was tied … there was hope yet in Sudsville.

Unfortunately, someone forgot to tell Jonny Gomes this was supposed to be Cream City’s day because he promptly led off the top of the eighth with a shot to left that just skipped over Hideki Matsui’s outstretched glove. Suddenly, the Pirates trailed again and time was running out.

The Pirates were retired meekly in the eighth inning, a two-out Ichiro Suzuki single wasted. The Sunsets were eliminated in the ninth.

Derek Jeter strode to the plate in the bottom of the ninth to lead off, facing Jason Isringhausen, who had come on with two-outs in the bottom of the seventh. Jeter wasted no time. On a 2-1 pitch, Jeter reached out and poked a ball to left that just kept going and going and going as though it were destined for greatness… dropping into the fourth row in left center field for a game tying home run. The crowd went berserk celebrating Jeter’s second home run of the game (the Pirates’ manager almost fell out of his chair). The Pirates failed to push anything else across and so the game continued to the tenth inning.

J. D. Drew led off the inning with a double to center off Neal Cotts. However, Cotts was up to the task and induced easy outs from the next three batters.

The stage was set.

Brandon Inge led off with a double to center off Hector Carrasco. Humberto Cota grounded out to second, allowing Inge to move to third. Montreal decided to pitch to Suzuki with the infield in and that strategy worked when Suzuki lined out to Ellis for the second out.

Now, Sunsets manager Daniel Valois faced a choice. Running out of pitchers, he decided to walk the red-hot lefty, Lofton, to pitch to Derek Jeter … a much more favorable match-up for the right-handed Carrasco.

Junior Spivey came on to pinch run for Inge and the Pirates decided to try some trickery. Lofton took off, hoping that the ball would come to second, giving Spivey a chance to steal home. But the Sunset foiled that by holding the ball. It was up to Jeter.

In hindsight, who could have known this was Derek Jeter’s day. The percentages favored the moves Valois made. It didn’t matter. Jeter took the pitch from Carrasco and sent it deep into the left field seats for a walk-off three-run home run, his third of the game. Bedlam ensued (imaginary and real).

The Pirates were going to the World Series.

Conservatives and Rationality

Tom Tomorrow

Sounds About Right

This has probably been winging its way around the world on the Internet for some time now. However, my sister sent it to me and I thought it funny.

A Japanese company (Toyota ) and an American company (General Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.

Feeling a deeper study was in order, American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the "Rowing Team Quality First Program", with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.

The End.

Gun Nuts Are Weird

Gun nuts are … well, nuts. I’ve no problem with 2nd Amendment rights, but have always been against the ownership of assault rifles. I see no reason for them. One of their own criticizes the use of these and he is set upon by the NRA … like a pack of rabid dogs.

SEATTLE - Modern hunters rarely become more famous than Jim Zumbo. A mustachioed, barrel-chested outdoors entrepreneur who lives in a log cabin near Yellowstone National Park, he has spent much of his life writing for prominent outdoors magazines, delivering lectures across the country and starring in cable TV shows about big-game hunting in the West.

Zumbo's fame, however, has turned to black-bordered infamy within America's gun culture -- and his multimedia success has come undone. It all happened in the past week, after he publicly criticized the use of military-style assault rifles by hunters, especially those gunning for prairie dogs.

Not a Composition

The macabre fixation on the woman who had no talent, Anna Nicole Smith, continues unabated. Now, the wrangling resulting in continued delay of burial is affecting her remains.

Since it is a bit much to want to watch Anna wither away, follow the link below to a site that will provide more information than you care on the process of decomposition.

Decomposition of a corpse is a continual process that can take from weeks to years, depending on the environment. In this website we have divided the process into stages, which are characterised by particular physical conditions of the corpse and the presence of particular animals. To illustrate the process of decomposition, we use the piglet as the model corpse.

Why piglets?

A 40 kg pig resembles a human body in its fat distribution, cover of hair and ability to attract insects. These factors make pigs the next best things to humans when it comes to understanding the process of decay of the human body.

The pigs in this website are newborn piglets (weighing about 1.5 kg) that have been accidentally crushed by their mothers - a key cause of death of piglets. Their bodies have been donated to science.

Call Me in the Morning

I am not sure exactly how it works, but this is amazingly accurate. Read the full description before looking at the picture.

The picture below has two identical dolphins in it. It was used in a case study on stress levels at St. Mary 's Hospital.

Look at both dolphins jumping out of the water. The dolphins are identical. A closely monitored, scientific study revealed that, in spite of the fact that the dolphins are identical, a person under stress would find differences in the two dolphins.

The more differences a person finds between the dolphins, the more stress that person is experiencing. Look at the photograph and if you find more than one or two differences you may want to take a holiday.







I need a vacation.

Hate Is Not a Family Value

I don’t know how dislike or hate are manifested. I don't have a degree in psychology or sociology. I have opinions. However, before delving into those, I think I will spend some time recording some thoughts I have had of late.

My inner thoughts are not pure as the driven snow. I suspect they are not very different from others … I mean, how different are we really in our thoughts? Not like we’ll ever know, it’s really how we act on these thoughts and impulses that delineates us from each other.

I’m going to make some confessions … some public confessions that may expose me to ridicule, to some these confessions will be the height of hypocrisy, perhaps others will see themselves in these confessions. I don’t know. These confessions, these – not epiphanies, more like discordant voices – are my own. They belong to me, no one else. I imply nothing for anyone else.

I don’t understand why or how a person is gay. I find the idea of the homosexual sexual act between males repugnant. I find it less repugnant when females are involved and I find the idea of anal intercourse not repugnant at all when a woman and man are involved. Why is this? It’s not very flattering and I am ashamed that it is true. But it is true.

I have used the word faggot in anger, most recently to my younger brother, who is gay. We had an argument. It got heated and I said it. Calling him a faggot broke the tension and we both started laughing, yet it is a hurtful word. I have thought the word when I have seen a man whose appearance or actions were overly effeminate. I’ve thought other hurtful words regarding woman who looked overly mannish … I’ve likely verbalized them as well, though privately or with associates of mine in a joking manner. Why is this?

I am not proud of this.

I also confess to being less than charitable in my thoughts towards blacks, African-Americans, Afro-Americans, negroes, niggers … there are many other variations and I’ve thought them all (other than some vague regional variations that I may not have come in contact with). Just the fact there are so many variations convinces me that I am not alone with my disturbing thoughts. I have been cut-off by a black person while driving on the highway and have used that really awful phrase … damn nigger. I have assumed that a person driving like an idiot was a nigger, only to find it was not true.

When walking in a mall, and I see a number of young black males walking toward me, I am usually more cautious and more prone to think that they are up to no good, or are lazy, or sell drugs, rape kill steal plunder … etc. Why is this?

I am not proud of this.

I do not find myself thinking thoughts such as these when regarding people of Asian descent nor people of Hispanic descent. I seem to have avoided that. Why is this?

So, there, I have said it. Now, the fact is I have many friends who are black. I enjoy their company and feel completely at ease with them. I don’t think of them as black. Ever. Just as friends. I have had black people over for supper, as guests, and have gone on outings with them. I dated a few beautiful black women … years ago. So why these thoughts?

As I mentioned earlier, I have a younger brother who is gay. I love him dearly. He’s a goofball and he would be the picture in a dictionary for the entry (if there were one) of a liberal looking at the world through rose-colored glasses. He does not read or listen to the news because of all the hateful things that are reported. He is always there to help, often when it has not been asked for … which can sometimes be very annoying. He’s a very loving and good person.

I have met numerous friends of his. One friend is somewhat confused about his-her-his sexuality … yes, I have seen this individual as a male and in the process of becoming a female. And then back again. It’s odd to me why. I don’t understand it and likely never will.

I have met homosexuals who are flamers, limp-wrested and who shake hands like Greta Garbo, you know, palm down with fingertips extended and quickly withdrawn. I’ve met others whom I would not want to meet on a football field for fear of being run over.


Where do these “uglinesses” come from. Certainly one is not born with these pre-determined within us. My seven-week old daughter harbors no prejudices towards gays or blacks. She cares only to be held, fed, changed, and nurtured in a loving way. My two other children, 11 and 6 years old are the same way. They have been brought up in a household that is accepting of others. They love my younger brother and they have black “uncles” who are very special to them.

I grew up in a time and geographical place which was more suspicious of blacks and dismissive of gays. There were none that lived near us. My father was very conservative (not a slap at conservatives, just a fact). His parents were the same. My grandmother could be very gracious if she met a black woman (very rare in the Fox Valley back then), but in the next breath would tell my little sister, upon hearing she was dating a person who was American Indian, that she did not want any black babies.

I remember Dad making derogatory comments about men who appeared a bit too “swishy,” and yet upon hearing one of his sons was gay, admitted that while he did not understand it, he still loved him. I’ve also heard him say similar vulgarities about blacks, usually when watching news on the television, and then be generous and gracious when meeting a black executive, even inviting him to our home.

It’s a weird world we live in.

It’s been a long journey from growing up in a place that only knew blacks existed on television, and gays did not exist, except in their closets. Change is always hard. I feel strongly that blacks still need assistance in gaining equality in our society. I am equally saddened and appalled by the strife in our inner city. It’s easy to say that “they” need to take responsibility and pull themselves up by their bootstraps, without standing in those boots. For the vast majority of whites, the life of an inner city black kid is as foreign as the culture of a foreign land. Quite simply, blacks in our inner cities do not have the same opportunities as we have had. I cannot say with any kind of certainty what the answer is to the death and poverty in our inner city, yet so many think they can and do … but they say these things from a point of view that has no relation to the one they are commenting about. The same goes for homosexuals and the irrational assault on the wishes of many of them to enjoy the same rights as their countrymen, and marry the person they have fallen in love with.

It really comes down to fear. I was taught that somehow blacks and homosexuals were different. Their difference was what was feared. Only by teaching and raising our children in an atmosphere of love and respect will these fears be put to rest. Only then will my children … our children … not have to face the task of introspection and try to come to terms with the ugliness and anger that reside within.


If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion. – Dalai Lama

Love Has No Boundaries

A virile, middle-aged Italian gentleman named Guido was relaxing at his favorite bistro in Rome when he managed to entice a spectacular young blonde woman to his table. Things progressed to the point where he invited her back to his apartment and, after some small talk, they retired to his bedroom where he "rattled her" senseless.

After a most pleasant interlude he asked with a smile, "So, you finish?" She paused for a second, frowned, and replied, "No." Surprised, Guido reached for her and the rattling resumed. This time she thrashed about wildly and there were screams of passion.

The performance finally ended and, again, Guido smiled and asked, "You finish?"Again, after a short pause, she returned his smile, cuddled closer to him and softly said, "No." Stunned, but damned if he was going to leave this woman dissatisfied, Guido reached for her yet again.

Using the last of his strength, he barely managed it, but they ended together screaming, bucking, clawing and ripping the bed sheets. Exhausted, Guido fell onto his back, gasping. Hardly able to turn his head, he looked into her eyes, smiled proudly and asked again, "You finish?"

Barely able to speak, the beautiful blond whispered in his ear, "No, I Norvegian".

This Had to be Painful

I don't know if anyone else saw this, but I was flipping through stations and came upon the final part of Wayne Newton's act just before the beginning of the NBA all-star game. Who thought having Wayne Newton perform was a good idea, other than blue-haired grandmas, Fred Dooley or maybe dad29? You know, natural NBA fans.

At the conclusion of his act there were, maybe, one or two isolated claps from the audience. Newton didn't know what to do. He finally turned and walked off, still waiting for a couple more huzzahs to the end. None came.

I almost felt bad.

How Can Anyone Be Okay With This?

In the words of a local conservative blogger (I'll keep his name out of this, no reason to pile on) who supports Bush policies every chance he gets ... "I'm okay with this." I wonder if he is really okay with THIS.

h/t This Modern World

At the Morgue.

We were asked to send the next of kin to whom the remains of my nephew, killed on Monday in a horrific explosion downtown, can be handed over. The young men of the family, as was customary, rose to go.

“NO!” cried his mother. “Isn’t my son enough?? Must we lose more of our youth?? You know there are unknowns who wait at the Morgue to either kill or kidnap the men who dare reach its doors. I will go.”

So we went, his mum, his other aunt and I.

I was praying all the way there.

I never thought a day would come when it was the women of the family, who would be safer on the roads. All the men are potential terrorists it seems, and are therefore to be cut down on sight. This is the logic of today, is it not? To kill evil before it even has a chance to take root.

When we got there, we were given his remains. And remains they were. From the waist down was all they could give us. “We identified him by the cell phone in his pants’ pocket. If you want the rest, you will just have to look for yourselves. We don’t know what he looks like.”

Now begins a horror that surpasses anything I could have possibly envisioned .We were led away, and before long a foul stench clogged my nose and I retched. With no more warning we came to a clearing that was probably an inside garden at one time; all round it were patios and rooms with large-pane windows to catch the evening breeze Baghdad is renowned for. But now it had become a slaughterhouse, only instead of cattle, all around were human bodies. On this side; complete bodies; on that side halves; and EVERYWHERE body parts.

We were asked what we were looking for, “ upper half” replied my companion, for I was rendered speechless. “Over there”. We looked for our boy’s broken body between tens of other boys’ remains’; with our bare hands sifting them and turning them.

We found him millennia later, took both parts home, and began the mourning ceremony.

Can Hollywood match our reality?? I doubt it.


"Inside Iraq" chronicles daily life in a war zone through the words of Iraqi journalists in McClatchy's Baghdad Bureau as they risk so much each day to survive. These are unedited first hand accounts of their experiences. Their complete names have been withheld for security reasons.

Blowhard

Important information from my mother ... never fart in a wet suit.