Shakesville

hello!

Taking my cue from Patrick, I thought I'd say hello and intro myself. I run a small blog called expostulation. I'm nowhere near as exciting as Patrick, what with the punk band and all. I, too, live in a conservative area--SW Ohio. My Professional Geek hubby and I have four kiddos who are taking nicely to our liberal brainwashing (muwahahaha!) and a dog who thinks he is a person named "Damnit Dog What Are You Doing" (though his real name is Copper, because we're just that original).

I'm also extremely honored that Shakes invited me to guest-blog. Which reminds me, here is something I thought was interesting (and no, not because of my thing for Bono. Honest!). Seems Bono met with Shrub about the poor people of the world (because, as we know, Bush gives two shits about them). That's not the interesting part. This is:

[Bono] said he once criticized Bush for not getting the Millennium Challenge money out quick enough and was rebuked for it. "One senator threw a newspaper at me in a meeting. 'How dare you disrespect the president of the United States!'" Bono told [Rolling Stone].

What is with these people?! I mean, really. Bush is not a king for chrissakes. What I'd love to know is who the senator was that throws things like a pissed off toddler.

One Last Post Before I Go...

As Patrick noted, I'm off to my little (and only) sister's wedding this weekend. It will be a very happy occasion, as she is marrying a man I dig immensely, and who, more importantly, loves both her and her son to pieces. Her soon-to-be-husband is absolutely hilarious, with just a wicked sense of humor. He's also a conservative Catholic Republican, so we love to harass each other (quite good-naturedly) about politics.

They had a seven-year friendship before he realized he couldn't live without her and proposed (very When Harry Met Sally). One night, when they were in town, the four of us went out to dinner, and my sister was recounting how she told him four years ago that she had fallen for him, but he brutally rebuffed her. He jokingly responded, "Hey, it was 2001 - that was a tough year; lots of stuff going on...there was 9/11 -" I immediately interrupted, "Wow, Republicans really do use that as an excuse for everything!" He laughed until his face was red.

Recently, at my cousin's wedding, the whole extended family was getting together for one big picture. The photographer asked everyone to move left. As we shuffled over, my imminent brother-in-law said, "We're all moving left - just like Melissa has always wanted!"

Boy, I can't wait for those indictments...

Both Patrick and Misty from Expostulation will be keeping you company this weekend. Thanks to you both!

As for me, I'll be spending a little time before I go at Lefty's Bar, where tonight's theme is Scary Monsters, Super Freaks. With apologies to David Bowie, whose Scary Monsters (Super Creeps) is one of my favorite songs:

They have the Oval Office; they are crooks and they cannot hide
When you look into their eyes, they are dead and nobody home
Well, they’d probably be killers if they fought in war, but they’re cowards inside
They opened strange doors that we’ll have to close again

They began to wail
Excuses scream
Waiting for indictments
Know what I mean?

Scary monsters, super freaks
Keep me running, running scared
Scary monsters, super freaks
Keep me running, running scared

They asked to stay; got just enough votes
They asked for our trust and libs gave them a finger in the air
Now they’re stupid in the street and they can’t justify
Why anyone should trust them after all their stinking lies

They wail
Fitzy’s on the case
Excuses scream
Waiting for indictments
Know what I mean?

Scary monsters, super freaks
Keep me running, running scared
Scary monsters, super freaks
Keep me running, running scared

Scary monsters, super freaks
Keep me running, running scared
Scary monsters, super freaks
Keep me running, running scared

Oh oh woh-oh
Oh, oh-oh-oh oh
Oh oh oh, oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh

Friday Night Fun

Okay, this seriously cracked my shit up!

Passed on by the Finder of Good Things, Shaker Deborah, who notes:

It's obvious that you, your readers, and I share a near-obsessive love of wonderful movies and books...

In honor of that, I send along this clip which, among other things, demonstrates the awesome transformative power of the cutting room.

Now I have to go watch it again.

Shep

Does Fox News, bastion of all things GOP, know about this?

Shepard Smith, who hosts a popular program on Fox News and received widespread praise for his work covering Hurricane Katrina’s aftermath, also dodges questions about his sexual orientation.

Smith once chatted me up in a New York City gay piano bar, bought me drinks, and invited me back to his place. When I declined, he asked me to dinner the next night, another invitation I politely refused.

We sat at the bar chatting and drinking martinis until 3 a.m., our conversation interrupted only when he paused to belt out the lyrics to whatever showtune was being performed.

Wev. Who cares? The only thing notable about this story is, as Raw Story notes, that it appeared in a paper that previously criticised outing and hypocrisy by outers. What up, Washington Blade?

News from Shakes Manor

Wednesday night, while watching the Astros-Cards game…

Shakes: Such a weird way to pronounce that name—Ohs-walt.

Mr. Shakes: Aye.

Shakes: We should start telling people our name is pronounced McEee-wan.

Mr. Shakes: I’m shoore there are people who proonoonce it McEee-wan.

Shakes: No there aren’t.

Mr. Shakes: Yes, there are.

Shakes: Not.

Mr. Shakes: Are.

Shakes: Not.

Mr. Shakes: Are.

Shakes: Not.

Mr. Shakes: We coold be trendsetters, and demand that we be called the McEee-wans, and then there woold be.

Shakes: But if we’d be trendsetters, then you’re admitting there are no people who currently call themselves McEee-wan.

Mr. Shakes: Ooh, you’ve goot me! Coongratoolatoons! You’ve woon the Great McEee-wan Debate of 2005. Lincooln and Dooglas woold be soo prood!

In the ensuing tussle, I’m certain there was reference made to my doominant noostril.

Caption This Photo

You think you've got me?
You haven't got me.
Idiots.

Fresh Kidz

Toast sent me a link to this story, and we’ve been having an interesting conversation about it. Anyway, I thought I’d throw it out there, along with my thoughts, and see what others make of it.

AMHERST, Mass. There are no freshmen at Amherst Regional High School.

Following in the steps of several area colleges, ninth-grader is now the official term used for first-year students. School officials say the term freshman was dropped because of the male connotation of the word.

Assistant principal Marta Guevara said yesterday that the change to ninth-grader was initiated nearly two years ago during a week that highlighted issues surrounding violence against women.

Ninth-grader Sam Hart of Shutesbury told the Springfield Republican that he doesn't see the term freshman as sexist. And he notes there are other words that have man in them.

And what, pray tell, are we going to call college freshmen? Thirteenth-graders?

I understand, and support, a certain amount of what is usually derogatorily referred to as language policing; substituting humankind for mankind is clearly preferable, and making changes like policeman to police officer, or fireman to firefighter, are not purely symbolic (as the anti-PC crowd would have us believe), but a good way to honor the women who increasingly join these professions. But removing the word freshman from the lexicon doesn’t seem to serve any but a symbolic purpose, because the word no longer has male connotations outside of its etymology. Our cultural understanding of it is different—policemen may yet conjure an image singularly populated by men in uniform; freshmen does not yield the same results. Is there really anyone who hears the word freshmen and thinks of nothing but a group of apple-cheeked lads in jackets and ties anymore?

There’s something about this that is primarily offensive to my sensibilities as a lover of language and as a student of culture, something that the other aforementioned changes in language (which aptly represent a change in culture) do not evoke. And perhaps someone will be keen to argue that such offense shouldn’t supercede a feminist’s interest in subverting patriarchal signifiers, irrespective of whether they are symbolic or not, but I also find my feminist sensibilities questioning the wisdom of linking the eradication of a word like freshman with “issues surrounding violence against women.” A lot of adults, never mind 14-year-olds, aren’t prepared to understand a convoluted causal link between language and violence. Without an entire course on explaining it (to which I would certainly not object, but I don’t see it being offered anytime soon in American high schools), I fear the eradication of this word that doesn’t have obvious patriarchal (or even specifically male) connotations will seem silly and easily dismissed, with the end result a wholescale rejection of any lessons the school attempted to impart. Eradicating violence against women is too important to be potentially undermined by symbolic gestures.

Happy One Year of Blogging...

....to Upon Further Review! (Definitely not a blogiversary. Ahem.)

John says he might be burnt out. Don't even joke about that, bub. If you go anywhere, I may crawl into a fetal position and waste away in a snarkless fugue.

Friday Cat Blogging

Life Goes On: The girls turn Jim’s sickbed into their lesbian love nest.

Why are you pointing that thing at me?

Stop taking pictures and put food in my bowl.

The Hammer Speaks!

Tom DeLay, or perhaps I should call him LL Cool Tom, has his own blog. And not only that, he's complaining about my glee in showing off his mugshot. Screw you, DeLay! I shake my fist in your general direction!

Who Knew a Horse’s Ass Could Smile?

After yesterday, of course, we all did, after witnessing DeLay’s idiotic mugshot. Shaker Deborah forwards this AP story which confirms my (and others’) suspicions that the whole point was not giving fodder to the Dems for midterm ads.

Why is Tom DeLay smiling? After all, he’s been indicted. Forced out of his job as House majority leader. And called into court for fingerprinting and a mugshot like a common criminal.

Answer: A photo of DeLay grinning from ear to ear doesn’t pack quite the punch in a Democratic attack ad as one that looks more like the mugshot of, say, actor Hugh Grant, after his arrest in 1995 for picking up a prostitute.

Note the House of Representatives security pin on DeLay’s lapel.

He looks in the photo like a proud member of Congress who might just have won the lottery, not one indicted on charges of money laundering. The photo looks like it could have been taken anywhere.

And that was just the point.

In any case, here’s something that brings us a little closer to the truth:

A full picture speaks 1,000 words—even though it only needs to speak two.

Crooked asshole.

White House in Turmoil

Today’s WaPo has an article (a rather delicious one, if I do say so myself) about the mess in which Bush currently finds himself.

With special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald driving his CIA leak investigation toward an apparent conclusion, the White House now confronts the looming prospect that no one in the building is eager to address: a Bush presidency without Karl Rove. In a capital consumed by scandal speculation, most White House senior officials are no more privy than outsiders to the prosecutor's intentions. But the surreal silence in the Roosevelt Room each morning belies the nervous discussions racing elsewhere around the West Wing.

[…]

"People are very demoralized and unhappy," a former administration official said. "The leak investigation is [part of it], but things were not happy before this took preeminence. It's just been a rough year. A lot has gotten done, but nothing is easy."

The one thing that isn’t mentioned is the prospect of a Bush presidency without Cheney. Whether this means that Cheney’s fairly certain he’s in the clear, or is further evidence of a falling out between Bush and Cheney (as in, Bush doesn’t care if his second is forced to hit the road), or isn’t indicative of anything at all, I have no idea.

After five years of speculation that Cheney is basically the foreign policy president and Rove is basically the domestic policy president, however, it’s an interesting possibility we face that one or both of our acting presidents may not be long for the Beltway world.

Recommended Reading

There’s a good profile of the DCCC’s Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Chicago) in Rolling Stone. Chicagoans are well familiar with Emanuel, but I don’t think he’s as much of a known quantity nationally. This is the guy tasked with taking back the House, though, so he's worth knowing. I’m interested to hear your thoughts—are you familiar with him? Were you aware of his role in the Clinton White House? What do you think of him?

One of the things that has always stuck me about Emanuel when I see him on one a show like Meet the Press, is that his “legendary intensity” and infamous “hyperactivity of an attack dog straining at the leash” and tendency toward “constantly fidgeting, gesturing, spinning” often come across as nervousness. He tries to calm himself down, but it doesn’t work. I kind of wish he’d just let himself be nutzoid, like Carville. It might suit him better.

Neil Shakespeare May Be an Evil Genius

Why? Because on Wednesday, he wrote this, as if it were just more of his sassy satire, but then today, I read this. Just what exactly do you know, my virtual brother, that you’re not telling us? Don’t make me come over there and give you a noogie.

Friday Blogrollin'

Demagogue, which is just full o’ good stuff.

Royally Kranked, because he’s cranky, clever, and uses "jerkoff" a lot.

Mike the Mad Biologist, who’s not only mad in both senses of the word, but smart, too.

Whatever, which totally doesn’t even need an endorsement, because, you know, whatever.

Rullsenberg Rules, an eclectic and interesting mix care of Nottingham, UK, which happens to be the home a dear friend who has taught me to shout NOT-IN-GUM FOREST while whenever clad in his ubiquitous football scarf.

Shorty PJs, which is not politics, but lots of other good stuff many of us also enjoy.

As always, let me know in comments if I ought to be reading your blog....

Question of the Day

Shaker Constant Comment suggested that, having explored what movie scenes make us laugh and cry, we go on to favorite romance scenes in movies. I like that one, and I know there are plenty of romantics around here who will probably like it, too. My all-time favorite has to be the scene in The Piano when Holly Hunter lifts her skirt, revealing the tiniest hole in her black stockings, through which peers the tiniest bit of her skin. Harvey Keitel puts his finger on top of the hole and gently caresses her; she sits bolt upright and her breath catches in her throat. The look she gives him...oh. It has to be one of the sexiest things ever put on film. So how about you? What's your favorite romantic scene of all time?

Christmastime Already?

It just seems to be coming earlier and earlier every year, doesn’t it? And nowadays, it’s not the sound of Christmas jingles on megastore loudspeakers, or green and red M&Ms, or even the announcements of holiday sales in the useless faux-newspapers which clutter my mailbox that make me realize how soon Christmas will be upon us. No, it’s the annual publication of a rightwing screed against liberal Scrooges and their radical anti-Christmas agenda.

This year’s early entry? The detestable John Gibson, with The War on Christmas: How the Conspiracy to Subvert Our Most Sacred Holiday Is Worse Than You Thought. And now I shall turn it over to The Green Knight:

So far, only one Amazon reviewer has given it more than one star, and he was being sarcastic.

First of all, the "secularization" of Christmas that Gibson decries has been happening ever since Coca-Cola put Saint Nicholas into a red-and-white fur suit and turned him into Santa Claus. Yes, Virginia, that was a corporate action, turning a saint into a toy dispenser. The "secularization" has been noted and complained about ever since -- but it hasn't been done by the big bad libruls; it's been done by the corporate world.

Second, absolutely nobody is forbidden to celebrate Christmas. Nobody. Never was, never will. Let's get a grip.

Third, if you really are a Christian, you know (as Gibson, judging by his title, apparently does not) that the most sacred Christian holiday is Easter. Not Christmas. Easter.

Fourth, and I just think this needs emphasizing, John Gibson is a bonehead.

As for me, I want to know where Gibson lives, a place where, evidently, this insidious war on Christmas has been so successful that he isn’t bombarded for two solid months with jingles, adverts, trees, ornaments, Santas, reindeer, Navitity Scenes, ringing bells, carols, elves, sleighs, garland, bedecked halls, lights, cantatas, ribbons, giftwrapping, North Stars, North Poles, candy canes, stockings, wreaths, mangers, hay, donkeys, wise men, pageants, snowmen, snow angels, and all other manner of Christmas-related decoration and celebration to the point where he feels sure he will vomit tinsel. Because if a place totally devoid of all that manufactured, bought, and sold holiday cheer exists, I’d love to move there.

Oh, Heavens to Betsy!

Blech. From USAToday:

In May, the Minnesota Office of Higher Education posted the inevitable culmination of a trend: Last year for the first time, women earned more than half the degrees granted statewide in every category, be it associate, bachelor, master, doctoral or professional.

Cause for celebration - or for concern?

Nice lede, jackholes. And the rest of the story is just as appalling, with absolutely no reference to the fact that often men without a degree can make just as much or more money than women with a degree. Until women don’t need to rack of up four years of schooling and the associated debts just to find commensurate employment with men who only graduated high school, there’s no reason to get a case of the vapors over the fact that men aren’t earning as many degrees. The game is structured so that women have to have more education to be competitive, so all these calls for affirmative action for men in college placement programs is either overtly or unintentionally supporting the idea that men must be given special privileges so…they can continue to have special privileges, like making more money than their female cohorts with the same amount of education.

Meanwhile, if I were a dude, I would be furious with a statement like this:

For his part, author Gurian says one reason colleges may fail to attract more men is precisely because they are more geared to female learning styles and interests. Colleges that want to compete for the dwindling pool of men should emphasize male interests, such as sports, he says, and offer more male role models.

Yeah, because guys can’t handle book-learnin’ without proximity to a ball and a field on which to fight other guys for it.

I’m sure you’ll be shocked to find out that Gurian “synthesizes science and religion, and applies them both to child care.” Not that you’d find that out from USAToday.

(Listen to Gurian’s bloviations, like how anorexia is a disease of loneliness, here.)

Heh

Even Christian Conservatives are starting to denounce Ann Coulter. And they've got a PowerPoint to prove it!

DeLay’s Mugshot

Care of Shaker Deborah:

I don’t believe I’ve ever seen someone so happy to be a criminal.

(Actually, that big grin was probably the smartest thing he's done in awhile. I'm sure the GOP will be breathing a collective sigh of relief that it's not the dour grimace we're used to seeing in mugshots, which would have been just too juicy a gift to the Dems with campaign ad season so close.)

UPDATE: The Smoking Gun now has a larger photo here. Still not very mugshotty, though.