Okay, here's a good survey. What in your opinion is the worst song ever? Like any "best" or "worst," this is a tough call. However, the one that sticks out in my mind is "She's Homeless (La Da Di, etc.)" by early 90s flash in the pan Crystal Waters. Being homeless never sounded so annoying!
Worst Song Ever
Happy Wanksgiving
Have I ever mentioned that I think James Dobson is an utter wanker? I think I might have. His newest plan to spread homobigotry, one of the cornerstones of his faith-based hate empire, is truly a doozy:
Focus on the Family has announced plans to distribute 5,000 balls during Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade to promote a website it operates that claims homosexuality is a disorder that can be changed through faith.I have to admit, I like the concept of throwing balls in people’s faces to try to cure them of homosexuality.
The balls - called "stress balls" are part of a major effort by FOF reach a wider audience during the holidays. Each ball carries the name of its advice site http://www.troubledwith.com/. The Web site also carries faith-based advice on topics ranging from eating disorders to depression.
The balls will be tossed out by volunteers along the route and is not part of the official parade. Because they will be on public property there is little Macy's can do.
[Web site creator Steve Walters] said the timing of the ad campaign was no accident.Exploitation of the vulnerable is especially charming during the holidays. I think, however, they ought to reconsider the balls idea and instead throw snow globes with little figures of gays flagellating themselves for their sinfulness. Not only would it be a stronger message, but I bet people would pay more attention if they were concussed by an anti-gay tchotsky.
"It's supposed to be the happiest time of the year, but for a lot of people it's just a reminder that things aren't working out so well in their lives," he said.
“Too many people are living their lives in quiet desperation, hurting and struggling through troubling situations because they just aren’t sure where to turn for help.”
Why, Guy, whyyy.....???
OMG - stop the presses! Can it be true? Well the headline has made it onto several blogs and entertainment websites so it must be solid fact - Guy Ritchie has "ditched" Kabbalah.
Oooo - Esther is gonna be pissed! First he thinks her album is "shit," now this??
All we can do is wait on pins and needles for Guy's next deadly move!
Still Furious
Okay, so I don't know if you remember but I used to post stuff around here occasionally. I was hardcore wrapped up in all the madness last year leading up to the Presidential election and I subsequently became instantly burnt out on Nov. 3, 2004. Let's say I crumpled into a steaming heap on the floor and never got up.
Everyone else who posts here does such an amazing job capturing the current political climate and providing their own invaluable insight. I can't compete with that kind of skill and firm command of the inner workings of all things bullshit and Bush, especially being out of it for so long. However, I can provide sarcastic and irreverent commentary on totally useless disposable pop culture "news." Consider it a brief respite from the depressing daily grind of the real world. I will take websites such as D-Listed as my inspiration and continue the tradition of some of my older posts to carry forth.
So there you go. My name is Mr. Furious and I'm still fucking FURIOUS(!) - just about stuff that doesn't really matter.
Some Things Are Certain...
The Heretik on the curious case of Jose Padilla.
SOME THINGS ARE certain in this case. While the Bush administration faced a firm deadline this Monday for filing charges and the defense has charged the evidence against him is dubious hearsay, Guantanamo itself, the treatment of detainees there, and the methods used to get detainees there in the first place will be on trial.There's more.
All I Want for Christmas is a Modicum of Perspective
Steve Benen guest-blogging at Political Animal:
Regardless, the right's perceived "war against Christmas" is getting pretty tiresome. Fox News' John Gibson has a bizarre book out, while and Bill O'Reilly, Charles Krauthammer, and the truly silly Committee to Save Merry Christmas will probably enjoy the holiday season by whining a lot.Adding to my Christmas list: One violin for Mr. O’Reilly.
And what's truly annoying is to hear complainers lose sight of those who really suffer. Last year, armed police broke up a Christmas Mass at an underground Catholic church in eastern China, arresting the priest, demolishing a makeshift pulpit and scattering two thousand worshippers. Around the same time, some seasonal temp at the mall wished Bill O'Reilly a generic "Happy Holidays" and he felt like a victim.
O…M…G
Oddjob points us to this story, which is so fucking nutzoid, I can hardly believe it.
US President George W. Bush planned to bomb pan-Arab television broadcaster al-Jazeera, British newspaper the Daily Mirror said, citing a Downing Street memo marked "Top Secret".What the hell…?! Spreading freedom and changing hearts and minds—by blowing up al-Jazeera. Great fucking idea. What an absolute asshole.
The five-page transcript of a conversation between Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair reveals that Blair talked Bush out of launching a military strike on the station, unnamed sources told the daily which is against the war in Iraq.
The transcript of the pair's talks during Blair's April 16, 2004 visit to Washington allegedly shows Bush wanted to attack the satellite channel's headquarters.
[…]
A source told the Mirror: "The memo is explosive and hugely damaging to Bush.
"He made clear he wanted to bomb al-Jazeera in Qatar and elsewhere. Blair replied that would cause a big problem.
"There's no doubt what Bush wanted to do -- and no doubt Blair didn't want him to do it."
Another source said: "Bush was deadly serious, as was Blair. That much is absolutely clear from the language used by both men."
A spokesman for Blair's Downing Street office said: "We have got nothing to say about this story. We don't comment on leaked documents."
[…]
The newspaper said that the memo "casts fresh doubt on claims that other attacks on al-Jazeera were accidents". It cited the 2001 direct hit on the channel's Kabul office.
The Perfect Model
The Hotline’s Chuck Todd is feeling bullish about New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, about whom he notes, “If a Democratic consultant were trying to create the ideal presidential candidate, Richardson would be the model.” On what, exactly, does he base this analysis?
When searching for potential Democratic roadblocks to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's likely march toward the 2008 Democratic nomination, a few candidates stand out. One is New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson…Todd also references Richardson’s “gargantuan ego” and the lack of a “soft side,” noting that the latter might make him less attractive to the key demographic of married women over 40, but also fills the “toughness” gap “that's usually missing from Democratic candidates on all levels.” Additionally:
He's a sitting Western governor from a red state who has vast experience in foreign affairs, including first-hand experiences in countries of the highest concern to this country. He's an ethnic mix of Northeastern blue blood and Mexican but has a governing ideology that's pro-business with left-of-center tendencies. He's a Latino in appearance with a gringo last name who speaks fluent Spanish. All future presidential candidates should have experienced electoral defeat at least once (Richardson's done that) and all should have an incredible ambition that borders on overdrive which launched their career. (Richardson has that, just look at how he carpetbagged his way into New Mexico's congressional delegation in a mere four years of taking up residency.)
He is a politician who makes a lot of gut decisions that sometimes seem silly -- and ridiculously self-serving -- at first and yet have allowed him to pile up an impressive list of accomplishments.Richardson has stuck me as a better-than-average speaker, but not approaching the talent of Clinton, Obama, or even Edwards. Beyond that, I know little about him, and I must admit, this profile did not endear him to me. I certainly don’t consider his being part-Mexican and a fluent Spanish-speaker a liability, but I don’t think it ought to be considered a particular strength on its own, either. Lacking a soft side doesn’t particularly interest or disinterest me. The combination of a gargantuan ego and gut decision-making reminds me too much of our current disaster-in-chief for me to feel especially thrilled about either. Such attributes, we have learned quite pointedly over the last five years, do not necessarily a good leader make.
Pro-business? I don’t consider that the hallmark of a strong liberal candidate. Left-of-center tendencies? Doesn’t sound particularly reassuring for resolute progressives.
I came away from this profile thinking Richardson is Hillary with a swarthy complexion and a penis, which, sadly, seems exactly what a Democratic consultant trying to create the ideal presidential candidate would deem the perfect model—and that says more about Democratic consultants than it does about Bill Richardson.
(Via Political Wire.)
Woodward’s a Scumbag
Which we all already know, but here’s more evidence.
Little aside:
On at least one occasion, Woodward seemed to slip and called his still-unknown source “he” instead of “the source.”Of course his source is a man. Bush’s women are too busy genuflecting to their lord and master to concern themselves with leaking information to reporters.
Question of the Day
What movie title, replacing only a single word with the name “Bush,” best sums up the Bush administration to you?
(Examples: Mr. Bush Goes to Washington, Bush: The Revenge, Bush Wars...)
My vote has to go for Fun with Dick and Bush, because it references Dark Lord Cheney and has the added benefit of sounding dirty.
Also feel free to come up with a more specific reference, like, “My most fervent hope for the Bush administration: Bush, Interrupted.”
(Warning: Once you start, it quickly becomes addictive!)
Incurious
Ez describes this as revealing “more about the Bush administration's mindset and weaknesses than just about anything else we've seen.” I think he’s right, and, beyond that, I find it quite sad. I’ve known incurious people who refuse to try alien things, whether those things be culinary, cultural, or anything else; they are invariably some of the most vociferous defenders of American Superiority in All Things—and also, at their cores, very frightened and unhappy people. I can’t imagine how much less enjoyable it is to go through life feeling intimidated by anything unfamiliar, masking one’s fear with a lack of curiosity and wondering, from the sidelines, what it’s like to feel the invigoration of jumping in feet first.
That's, Like, Totally Existential, Dude
You scored as Existentialism. Your life is guided by the concept of Existentialism: You choose the meaning and purpose of your life. "It is man's natural sickness to believe that he possesses the Truth."
What philosophy do you follow? (v1.03) created with QuizFarm.com |
Via The Green Knight, who scores a 75% in Divine Command, where I scored a 0, heh.
Hey, Jerry Falwell: I’ve Got a Holiday Message For You…
Fuck off.
Evangelical Christian pastor Jerry Falwell has a message for Americans when it comes to celebrating Christmas this year: You're either with us, or you're against us.For anyone who’s interested, I’m starting my own campaign. Its slogan: “Jerry Falwell: It’s okay to call him a fat pot of crap.”
Falwell has put the power of his 24,000-member congregation behind the "Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign," an effort led by the conservative legal organization Liberty Counsel. The group promises to file suit against anyone who spreads what it sees as misinformation about how Christmas can be celebrated in schools and public spaces.
The 8,000 members of the Christian Educators Association International will be the campaign's "eyes and ears" in the nation's public schools. They'll be reporting to 750 Liberty Counsel lawyers who are ready to pounce if, for example, a teacher is muzzled from leading the third-graders in "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing."
An additional 800 attorneys from another conservative legal group, the Alliance Defense Fund, are standing by as part of a similar effort, the Christmas Project. Its slogan: "Merry Christmas. It's OK to say it."
A modicum of perspective:
"There is no war against Christmas," said Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "There is no jihad against Christians. There is nothing going on around Christmas except these groups' incessant fundraising."Hmm. Barry Lynn is a reverend, too. Interesting that he isn’t identified as such, though. I guess that might undermine the point that this isn’t a Christian v. Secular issue, but instead a wholly imaginary creation of hateful wingnuts who thrive on the outrage of their followers like Daddy Falwell.
Repeat after me: There is no War on Christmas. There is, however, a fairly significant assault on reality which, sadly, the media seem to have little inclination to contain.
McCain: Insane in the Membrane
Pam’s got more on McCain’s newest bout of insanity, including another luscious picture of the daft prick snuggling up with monkey-boy, a fun little email exchange between us, and more information on the CCC, which McCain’s candidate, Wallace, doesn’t think is full of anything but “good, patriotic people.”
Of Turtlenecks and Tube Tops
So there’s this totally stupid article in the WaPo best described as This Year’s Alarmist Crapport about Teen Girls Dressing as Sluts, some version of which has undoubtedly appeared in the Post every year since its 1877 inception.
“Have you seen Gertrude’s daughter’s bustle?
One could nearly discern that she had an ass.”
“Oh, Mildred—you have given me the vapors!”
Now, for a thoughtful analysis and discussion of this article, see Jill at Feministe and the associated comments thread. (Amanda, too.) I, on the other hand, will focus on two specific passages employing the perfunctory “celebrity comparison” device, and will use sarcasm and mockery to call attention to the overall comprehensive uselessness of the piece. First, we’ll start with this little gem:
Even famous people can be modest. They don't have to be Britney Spears. Take Audrey Hepburn, who has no counterpart today. Part of her allure lay in the way she embodied humility and modesty. Yet she also conveyed spirit and originality and a strong sense of self.Audrey Hepburn has no counterpart today? I mean, if all we’re talking about is a woman’s ability to keep her tits and ass-crack covered up while conveying style and self-esteem, I can give you a list: Liv Tyler, Gwyneth Paltrow, Nicole Kidman, Queen Latifah, Renee Zellweger, Penelope Cruz, Björk (goose dress notwithstanding), Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet, Angela Bassett, Ashley Judd, Julia Roberts, Cate Blanchett, Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Connelly, Charlize Theron, Monica Bellucci, Uma Thurman, Tina Fey, Ziyi Zhang, Kirsten Dunst…
A whole international list of women who project confidence and style without being regularly photographed with bare midriffs and thongs hanging out the waistbands of their jeans—and none of them ever consented to star in a film with Mickey Rooney doing an embarrassingly insulting impersonation of a hideous Asian stereotype, either.
Speaking of modesty…
Anyway, we move on to the next quote, which not only employs the perfunctory “celebrity comparison” device, but also includes the obligatory-since-1985 Madonna reference:
Have we come a long way, baby? The Lennon Sisters and Gidget of girlhoods gone by are light-years from today's Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan. The bridge between these two generations of stars was Madonna -- before she had children and cleaned up her act.Someone needs to do a little pop culture reconnaissance, methinks, unless this signifies a cleaner act than boob-cones:
Madge Vag.
My point here is not to dis Audrey—or Madge, for that matter (that’s her husband’s job)—but simply to illustrate a few basic facts…namely, that Audrey wasn’t the world’s last fashion-forward iconoclast, and that Madonna can still give any teenage trash a run for her money, even after kids and Kabbalah. (And good for her.)
Which brings us to the moral of this story—we can do away with these stories from now on, because there always has been and always will be some girls who wear turtlenecks in the summer, and some who wear tube tops in the winter, and everyone else in between. And it doesn’t matter, because Madonna’s the world’s biggest whore. Or something like that. The End.
Hilarifying II
Crooks and Liars has video of Bush getting flummoxed by locked doors.
It's totally idiotic...and totally something I would do.
The Future’s So White, He’s Gotta Wear Shades
Today, John “Timbuk 3” McCain, who I loathe with a fury not an iota less intense than the sun itself, is heading off to Alabama to host a fundraiser for Lt. Governor GOP primary candidate George Wallace, Jr. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree—Wallace is a four-time speaker for the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC), a group which was created from the mailing list of the old white supremacist White Citizens Councils and has been noted as becoming increasingly “radical and racist” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which classifies the CCC as a hate group. The group opposes interracial marriage, hate crime legislation, massive immigration of non-European and non-Western peoples, and “Afrocentric” curricula in schools, but Wallace says he finds “nothing hateful” about the group.
That’s good enough for McCain, apparently, who’s not only endorsing Wallace, who he calls a “committed conservative reformer” (which I suspect is different from my belief that the both of them ought to be committed), but has also consented to attend fundraisers in Mobile, Birmingham, and Huntsville, to help get this douchebag racist elected.
In June, when Wallace gave the opening remarks to the CCC’s national meeting, he said the attendees appeared to be “good, patriotic people.” So what, exactly, do these good, patriotic people say about themselves?
"We believe that the United States derives from and is an integral part of European civilization and the European people and that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character. We also oppose all efforts to mix the races of mankind, to promote non-white races over the European-American people through so-called "affirmative action" and similar measures, to destroy or denigrate the European-American heritage, including the heritage of the Southern people, and to force the integration of the races."Yeah, the Nazis were good, patriotic people in kind of the same way.
As for John McCain: Straight Talkin’ White Supremacist, here’s his Straight Talk on Wallace, via one of his top advisers, John Weaver:
“George Wallace Jr., is an enlightened progressive leader who always speaks of tolerance and carries forth his father's views at the end of his life. He has strong support across the racial and political spectrum.”Keep on selling that load of shit, you daft prick. Come 2008, we’ll see who’s buying.
Geography Club
A Tacoma school district has banned a book about gay teens meeting on the internet because, according to School Superintendent Patti Banks, it might undermine the school’s message that meeting people in internet chatrooms is a high-risk activity. In the book, Geography Club, a teen who thinks he’s the only gay kid in school finds out the guy he met online in a gay chatroom is a popular jock, and they form what is essentially a covert GLBT club at school, calling it the Geography Club, because it sounds so boring, they don’t expect anyone else will join.
After a couple with kids in both the middle and high school requested the book be removed (there’s always got to be one hysterical family who raises hell about this kind of shit in every school system!), because “the book could result in a ‘casual and loose approach to sex,’ as well as encourage use of Internet porn and the physical meeting of people through chatrooms,” the book was banned—but not because it’s about the gays! Of course not!
In banning "Geography Club," Superintendent Patti Banks said she was alarmed by the "romanticized" portrayal of a teen meeting a stranger at night in a park after meeting the person — revealed to be a gay classmate — in an Internet chatroom.A parent who is contesting the ban notes that “the most important part of the book is that it's about bullying, outcasts, about tolerance,” and the author of the award-nominated book, Brent Hartinger, said:
She said her decision was not due to the homosexual theme of the novel by Brent Hartinger of Tacoma.
"We want to send a strong, consistent message to all our students that meeting individuals via the Internet is extremely high-risk behavior," Banks wrote in a letter Nov. 2 to two parents who requested the book's removal.
"To the extent that this book might contradict that message, I have determined it should not be in our libraries, in spite of other positive aspects (e.g., a strong anti-harassment theme)."
"The reason gay teens are drawn to the Internet is that's a safe place to explore their identity without being harassed or bullied... It's ironic my book would be pulled for this reason, contributing to this atmosphere of silence and gay intolerance."So because of a possible endorsement of a “casual and loose approach to sex” (but not, certainly not—no!, because the teens in the book are gay), and because, I guess, the protagonist doesn’t get his throat slashed after meeting someone from a chatroom, the best decision is to ban a book with positive messages about inclusion and self-esteem for gay teens. Well, I’ve got a couple of questions:
1. Is the best way to educate students about what parents and educators deem a risky behavior banning a book about it? If so, then I have a few suggestions for other books they might want to ban:
A Tale of Two Cities—Revolutions are pretty dangerous.
All Quiet on the Western Front—War is pretty dangerous, too.
The Red Badge of Courage—Ditto.
Johnny Got His Gun—Ditto.
I imagine the Tacoma Schools can take the idea and run with it from there.
2. Is categorically dismissing a behavior as risky, in which many students (and, likely, many of their parents) have already engaged without negative result, really the best way to educate them about it, or does such black-and-white dismissal of a complex issue undermine one’s credibility on the issue altogether? Parents and educators have been telling teens for decades not to smoke pot, and try to scare them with horror stories about how a single joint could ruin their lives, but kids still smoke pot—and the vast majority of those who do never experience any ill effects; how many kids have taken their first draw on a bong with the thought they were about to have some kind of zany experience, only to find themselves a little more mellow, a little bit giggly, a few minutes later, with the thought—at some point—that everyone who issued alarmist warnings about pot was totally full of shit. Pretending things are intrinsically evil or always dangerous when they’re simply not, for the supposed benefit of kids, is not only dishonest, but doesn’t work, and has the effect of undermining one’s authority on anything else on which one offers advice, as well. Yes, meeting a stranger from the internet “in real life” can be risky, but the risk can be easily lessened. Using the book as a jumping-off point to talk to kids about minimizing risk when meeting someone new (whether they met them online, or whether they’re out at a diner and get invited to a party at a stranger’s house) seems a heck of a lot more useful than banning the book.
3. Assuming for a moment that meeting a chatroom buddy outside the chatroom is such high-risk behavior that teens shouldn’t engage in it at all, is banning one book about it really going to prevent it from happening? Are the only kids in America who are going online and meeting people in person doing it because they’ve read this book? Somehow, I doubt it. Kids and adults alike are barraged with messages telling them to go online every day now—many of which are specifically geared toward finding people to meet. This book is one of possibly millions of messages that could enter a teen’s environment. On the other hand, how many positive messages do gay teens get every day? Call me kooky, but I think the affirming effects of the book for gay teens, merely by virtue of percentages, does indeed outweigh any possibility that it contradicts the school’s message on internet safety.
Two shrill and over-reactionary parents complained about the possibility that a book would endorse a behavior any parent with a kid online ought to be talking to that kid about anyway, and the school decided that their right to “protect” their kids from the real world is more important than providing encouraging and supportive reading material for every single gay (and gay-friendly) kid in both schools. Now, tell me again this isn’t about the book being about gays, that this isn’t about a couple of bigots who are desperate to make sure the homophobia they’re teaching at home isn’t undermined by some touchy-feely book about faggots. And tell me again that the school isn’t motivated by anti-gay sentiments, when what they have done is caved to two bullies by pulling a book off the shelves that tells us bullying is wrong.
Earth to America
So last night, Mr. Shakes and I watched Earth to America, a comedy special about global warming produced by Laurie David, the NRDC activist who is also the wife of Curb Your Enthusiasm’s Larry David—hence the comedy special. The intent was to raise awareness about the Stop Global Warming virtual march, which you can join here, and get information about taking action in big and small ways.
The show was pretty funny, and a lot more political than I expected. Bill Maher, as usual, pulled no punches, and Will Ferrell, doing his spot-on Bush impression, made an absolute mockery of a president totally disengaged not only from environmental issues, but science in general. Kevin Nealon reprised his old SNL character Mr. Subliminal to get in a few good digs, too. And Conan O’Brien read the cast of NBC’s made-for-TV-movie about global warming, starring, among others, the Penguin as Dick Cheney as Ralph Wiggum as George Bush.
In one segment, Dustin Hoffman and Leonardo DiCaprio read quotes from astronauts, the theme of which was looking back at earth and seeing not the borders that divide us but the planet that unites us. Jim Lovell came out at the end to make his own statement. It was really quite moving.
I even managed not to puke during Tim McGraw’s performance, mainly because he sounded more like old school country than the confederate pop calling itself country music that shows up at GOP conventions.
Anyway, I suspect it will be re-run at some point on TBS, and if you can catch it, I recommend it, if for no other reason than to see the passionate Robert Kennedy, Jr. speaking about why this issue is important—and Triumph the Insult Comic Dog interviewing GOP congressmen and making them look like absolute wankers.
