Who the hell's gonna win this thing?
I Hate Marmaduke
I hate most comics. Except for The Far Side and Calvin and Hobbes, both of whose creators saw fit to pack it in while their comics were still funny. Then again, most comics are never funny, so that makes what Gary Larson and Bill Waterson did impossible for most of their peers, based on our understanding of the time-space continuum. So, yeah. Most comics suck. But I especially hate Marmaduke. Which is why I find this just about the funniest thing I've ever seen.
Also, Cathy really blows.
America 2.0: The Final Frontier
If you thought this sounded like a story from The Onion, check this shit out.
Bush seeks to block enemies from space:
President Bush has signed an order asserting the United States' right to deny adversaries access to space for hostile purposes.Yeah, and not only that, but we’re gonna spread freedom to the whole universe bitchez!
Bush also said the United States would oppose the development of treaties or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit U.S. access to or use of space.
…"Freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power," the policy says. "In order to increase knowledge, discovery, economic prosperity, and to enhance the national security, the United States must have robust, effective, and efficient space capabilities."
“Ground Control to Major Tom. We have turned a corner on Zingklop Alpha. The Zingklopian insurgency is in its final throes. Over.”
I honestly cannot stop giggling. Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that the Superbloggers took out Planet Limpwrist while we still had access to SPACE.
(Please blame Rick Santorum for my total inability to take anything seriously for the rest of the day.)
Caption This Photo
No Child Left in Peace to Do His Schoolwork.
(Actual Caption: U.S. President George W. Bush greets fifth grade student Daron Hill during his visit to the Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina, October 18, 2006. Bush also made remarks on his 'No Child Left Behind' education policy at the school. REUTERS/Jason Reed—UNITED STATES)
The Radical Left-Wing Agenda
I just saw this comment at a right-wing blog, and it so perfectly describes the Radical Left-Wing Agenda that I felt I should pass it on.
I had an interesting discussion with a conservative-leaning friend who doubted that liberals were anti-American, and sided with the terrorists. “Why would they want the terrorist to win?” he asked. I think it is quite simple.They’ve figured us out! We’ve got to find out who’s been leaking our plans. I think it’s probably Angelos. Bastard.
First, the left is still enamored by Marxist/Stalinist socialism. This is why they embrace Castro, Chavez, Kim, ad nauseum. I know this is different than Islamo-fascism, but hang in there, I’m getting there…
Second, left-wing extremists hate our free society. They do not appreciate hearing viewpoints that disagree with heir own. They believe that they already have all the answers, and any conflicting arguments are counter-productive at best.
Third, they believe their socialist ideal is achievable, but only after the current capitalistic, democratic republic is eliminated. Therefore, they see the Islamo-fascist sabotage of our country as an opportnity [sic] for their takeover. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”. They believe that after they can take over our country only after:
1. Islamists nuke Washington DC and the US Government fails, or
2. The democrats win both houses of congress and vote to surrender to the Islamo-fascists, or
3. The democrats win both houses of congress and vote to weaken our defenses to the extent that #1 or #2 occur.
Then the fun happens. The constitution will be re-written to change “rights” to “demands”. Free speech will be replaced by “correct” speach [sic]. Religion will be outlawed. Private property will be eliminated, and a system whereby income taxes will rise to 100%, with the government deciding how much money to distribute. We have seen this pattern before.
Of course, the Islamo-fascits [sic] have no special love for leftists, either. They will not be satisfied with nuking one US city. They have made their case quite clear…they intend to eradicate us “devils”. Even a leftist attempt to placate the Islamo-fascists by offering American Jews to them will not satisfy their hunger for western deaths.
This is the snapshot view of my opinion of the leftists’ motivations to our current problems.
The thing is, looking at our strategy all laid out like that, I’m realizing there are a couple of flaws. I mean, if we actually vote to surrender to the Islamo-fascists, do you really think they’re going to let us outlaw religion? Upon reflection, it does seem kind of naïve to assume that religious fundamentalists are going to go along with the whole criminalization of religion thing. Maybe we should start working with the Chinese.
Either way, they’ll totally let us ban Christmas!
Is that a promise?
"I think I'd just commit suicide." — Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), quoted by Radio Iowa, on what he would do if Democrats take control of the U.S. Senate. (Via Political Wire.)
alt.nerd.obsessive
I see that little Ricky Santorum is going for that coveted geek vote.
Embattled U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum said America has avoided a second terrorist attack for five years because the “Eye of Mordor” has been drawn to Iraq instead.The jocks then pantsed him, and dragged him on his bare butt around the track the entire lunch period.
Santorum used the analogy from one of his favorite books, J.R.R. Tolkien's 1950s fantasy classic “Lord of the Rings,” to put an increasingly unpopular war in Iraq into terms any school kid could easily understand.
“As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else,” Santorum said, describing the tool the evil Lord Sauron used in search of the magical ring that would consolidate his power over Middle-earth.
“It's being drawn to Iraq and it's not being drawn to the U.S.,” Santorum continued. “You know what? I want to keep it on Iraq. I don't want the Eye to come back here to the United States.”
Tip 'o the Energy Dome to Jon, who says:
Dear Pennsylvania,"Oh, I've wasted my life."
Please do not reelect this man to the Senate.
Thank you.
your friend,
Jon
Update: Waveflux has more.
Kenneth Lay’s Conviction Revoked
Legal analysts said Lake's ruling closely hewed to a long-held doctrine called abatement, which allows a conviction to be vacated if defendants die before they are able to exercise their right to appeal. Courts typically rule that defendants' constitutional rights to challenge their convictions outweigh other considerations, and the law hesitates to punish the dead, the analysts said.This means the nearly $44 million the government was trying to recover from his estate, to begin to make amends to the people who were collectively screwed by his criminal mischief to the tune of billions of dollars, will now probably never be collected.
Rendered Asunder
Humanity may split into two sub-species in 100,000 years' time as predicted by HG Wells, an expert has said.Insert your own joke here.
Evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry of the London School of Economics expects a genetic upper class and a dim-witted underclass to emerge.
The descendants of the genetic upper class would be tall, slim, healthy, attractive, intelligent, and creative and a far cry from the "underclass" humans who would have evolved into dim-witted, ugly, squat goblin-like creatures.I feel so torn. As an intelligent person, I’m rooting for the upper class. As a squat, goblin-like creature, I’m rooting for the underclass. What’s a girl to do?
For someone who actually has something intelligent to say about this article, go see Majikthise.
Ouch
A billboard along Interstate 95 in Stratford, Conn., is shown Monday, Oct. 16, 2006. Weighing in on Connecticut's hotly contested congressional races, a group of religious activists unveiled a giant billboard Monday off the busy interstate that accuses four candidates of voting to allow torture. (AP Photo/Bob Child)
Hat tip to SAP.
Boo Hoo
Somebody call the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for the poor preznit:
On desks around the West Wing sit digital clocks counting down the days and hours left in the Bush presidency, reminders to the White House staff to use the time left as effectively as possible. As of 8 a.m. today, those clocks will read 825 days, four hours. But if the elections go the way pollsters and pundits predict, they might as well read 20 days.Emboldened by victory, and bitter from grievance? LOL. Yeah, that—or maybe they just would be blocking Bush’s agenda on principle because it’s total crap.
At least that would be the end of George W. Bush's presidency as he has known it. If Democrats win one or both houses of Congress on Nov. 7, the result will transform the remainder of Bush's time in office and dramatically shift the balance of power in Washington.
…Emboldened by victory, and bitter from grievance, Democrats could use their ascendance to block Bush's agenda, force him to respond to theirs and begin a new era of aggressive oversight and investigation.
Most worrisome to the White House is the subpoena power that Democrats would gain with a majority in the House or Senate. For years, Republicans have been mostly deferential in scrutinizing the Bush administration, but Democrats are eager to reexamine an array of issues, such as Vice President Cheney's energy task force, the Jack Abramoff scandal and preparations for the Iraq war.Mostly deferential. Not wantonly complicit. Good lord.
After the election, Kaplan said, Bush will "look for partners in Congress" to accomplish priorities, such as extending his tax cuts, developing alternative energy supplies and promoting American competitiveness.I bet he will.
The question in the White House is whether Democrats would be willing to be partners. While Democrats see Bush as relentlessly partisan, his aides think Democrats have been deliberately obstructionist even on issues of little dispute. Against that backdrop of mutual suspicion, the two sides may find it difficult to come together.Hmm, vicious partisanship is all bluster and no substance? I guess a Republican would know.
"The Democrats are so blinded by their hate of Bush, they'll have a hard time even having a bill-signing with him," Republican lobbyist Ed Rogers said. "That might make for some good political contrasts, but not much substance."
I just love, love, how now that everyone thinks Bush and the GOP are about to go down in flames after years of not only pretending that the Democrats don’t exist, but that half the fucking country who didn’t vote for their sorry asses are traitors, it’s suddenly incumbent upon us to be nice and reasonable. You know what? Fuck off. I hope the Democrats tear every member of that administration who’s engaged in the criminal subversion of American principles a new asshole, and when they’re done, they sew ’em up and start over again.
Bubble Children
I know I'm probably going to get spanked for this one... but this is just ridiculous.
Mass. Elementary School Bans Tag
ATTLEBORO, Mass. - Tag, you're out! Officials at an elementary school south of Boston have banned kids from playing tag, touch football and any other unsupervised chase game during recess for fear they'll get hurt and hold the school liable.Okay, I completely understand why the school did this. In these overly litigious times, schools need to protect themselves, particularly when they don't exactly have extra money lying around to cover lawsuits.
Recess is "a time when accidents can happen," said Willett Elementary School Principal Gaylene Heppe, who approved the ban.
While there is no districtwide ban on contact sports during recess, local rules have been cropping up. Several school administrators around Attleboro, a city of about 45,000 residents, took aim at dodgeball a few years ago, saying it was exclusionary and dangerous.
Elementary schools in Cheyenne, Wyo., and Spokane, Wash., also recently banned tag during recess. A suburban Charleston, S.C., school outlawed all unsupervised contact sports.
"I think that it's unfortunate that kids' lives are micromanaged and there are social skills they'll never develop on their own," said Debbie Laferriere, who has two children at Willett, about 40 miles south of Boston. "Playing tag is just part of being a kid."
Another Willett parent, Celeste D'Elia, said her son feels safer because of the rule. "I've witnessed enough near collisions," she said.
That said: Jesus, can we just let kids have a little fucking fun?
The playgrounds I used to enjoy when I was young don't exist anymore. Swings have seatbelts now, for chrissakes. Remember those merry-go-round things that you used to spin on until you thought the centrifugal force was going to pop your arms right out of the sockets? Good luck finding one now. The playground surface near my old apartment was padded.
I'm not saying that parents shouldn't protect their children. I'm not saying that some games and playground equipment can't be dangerous. But, geez, isn't this overprotective "shield our kids from everything" mindset a little bit silly? I was particularly struck by the quote at the end of the article. Now, I'm sure she feels safer because of the rule, but something tells me she just might be putting words in her kid's mouth.
I don't know... I might be overreacting, but I read stories like this and just shake my head. I'm glad my parents didn't treat me like a fragile eggshell.
(Oh boy! Cross-posts! Iron helps us play!)
Rogers Outs Republican Senator
Mike Rogers, who calls himself "the nation’s leading gay activist blogger" has just finished a nationally-broadcast interview on the Ed Schultz Radio Show in which he alleges that Idaho Republican Senator Larry Craig has engaged in same-sex sexual activity.Craig has been denying rumors that he’s gay for at least 24 years. That’s a long time for a rumor to be hanging around.
Senator Craig’s office flatly rejected the claims. "The Senator says this story is absolutely ridiculous – almost laughable," said press secretary Sid Smith. “It has no basis in fact.”
Rogers said he has talked to three men unknown to each other who all reported in detail their sexual encounters with Craig over the last four years. The men were of legal age, Rogers said.
The conservative blogosphere is up in arms (hilariously, considering their willingness to use sex and sexuality as political issus) over Rogers’ latest outing, and some lefty bloggers are reporting the news with the caveat that they’re not going to get into a discussion about the ethics of outing. Well, fuck that. You know I will.
(Frankly, I would consider it just a wee bit disingenuous were I to report an outing if I wasn’t willing to stand by the strategy. And I am.)
I would absolutely not support the public outing of a private citizen whose sexuality had no bearing on his/her ability to do his/her job, and whose job had no association with perpetuating public discrimination against the LGBT community. That covers just about every private citizen in the country. Public officials, however, are actively involved in making decisions that affect the LGBT community, and if there’s a public official who consistently votes to limit their rights, but is only afforded his/her position to do so by virtue of the protection of a closet, that’s a real problem.
And it’s not just, or even mostly, a problem with the individual official, but a problem with what his/her party can accomplish as a whole by trading on the secrecy of the closet. It is only because the GOP can point to the Democrats as the party of queers that they can repeatedly use LGBT policy as a wedge issue. As Andrew Sullivan recently said in a Salon interview, “I think the time now is fully over when the closet can operate in Republican politics… We now have Mark Dyble being sworn in by Condi Rice as the new global AIDS coordinator, with his partner right there, with the families of both men there, and Condi Rice referring to Dyble's partner's mother as his ‘mother-in-law,’ and Laura Bush standing between them. Now, at what point can a party that does that also send out fliers in the Bible Belt saying that gay people are trying to ban the Bible and force heterosexuals into gay marriage? There's such a discrepancy between the closeted tolerance of the elite and the naked bigotry of the base.” As long as the GOP can depend on the closet, they can continue to appeal to that bigotry.
It’s not that Craig voted for banning of same-sex marriage (twice) and voted against prohibiting job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, because there were lots of straight Republicans who did that, too. It’s that Craig—and every other Republican hiding in a closet—gives the GOP the space to introduce such legislation in the first place. (And I genuinely don’t believe that even the GOP could withstand a public purging of gays from the party at this point; there would be much horror, far and wide.)
I understand the squeamishness among some people with this tactic, rooted in a belief that no one’s private life should be made public against their wishes. And I totally agree with that. But here’s the thing: one’s sexuality is only considered “private” if one is gay. There’s a reason no one’s ever “outed” as straight. If we truly believe there’s nothing shameful about being gay, then there should be no discomfort with identifying someone thusly. Ah, but Shakespeare’s Sister, you might say, it’s not dangerous to be straight. Being straight never cost anyone his or her job. Being straight never got anyone beat up or killed. Indeed not. But is anyone really againt outing primilary because they worry for Craig’s safety? If they’re honest, aren’t most people against outing because there’s a sense he will be humiliated, because we still attach some stigma to being gay, because of the undeserved preference which will never be eradicated so long as we have people making public policy predicated on it?
In a perfect world, we wouldn’t even be debating the ethics of outing, because the LGBT community would be seen as equal and no one, in either party, would feel compelled to hide in a closet in the first place. But we don’t live in a perfect world. We live in a world where a few closeted gays make possible legislative attempts to marginalize all gays. Do I feel compelled to protect a man like Craig while I watch people I love served up as a wedge issue every two years? Nope. It’s not pretty, but there it is.
Studds’ Husband Denied Pension
For the first time the surviving spouse of a member of Congress is being denied death benefits.Beloved by his constituents, who stuck by him after he was censured when a relationship with a 17-year-old page was revealed ten years after it happened, Studds served the same district for twelve terms, until he retired. Hara, as his spouse, should be eligible to collect more than half of his pension for the rest of his life (Studds collected about $114,337 annually). But because they're gay, Hara’s getting nothing—even though Studds contributed to the pension fund for the entirety of his 12 terms and the state he served has legalized same-sex marriage.
Dean Hara, who married former Massachusetts Rep. Gerry Studds shortly after same-sex marriage was legalized in Massachusetts in 2004, has been disqualified for benefits under the so-called federal Defense of Marriage Act
Studds, he first openly gay member of Congress died Saturday due to a blood clot in his lung. He was 69.
"A gay spouse will not receive any sort of pension or annuity or anything like that," Chad Cowan, a spokesperson for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which administers the congressional pension program told the Lowell, Massachusetts Sun.Meanwhile:
Bob Ney (R-Ohio) who pled guilty last week to conspiracy charges and faces up to 10 years in prison for taking bribes will receive about $29,000 a year from his pension for the rest of his life — even while he is in prison.Quite the priorities we’ve got in America, huh?
And, btw, this is a perfect example of why the whole "states' rights" argument regarding gay marriage is utterly stupid.
Halloweenie
Oh my.
Over a (cracker) barrel
Somewhere on the lengthy list of Places I've Never Been is this item: "Any Cracker Barrel restaurant." It's the kind of eatery I seldom even think about except while driving long distances on the interstate, and even then I always opt for fast food joints instead. When I do think of Cracker Barrel, however, it's not food that comes to mind, but race. Part of this may have to do with the use of "cracker" as a Southern racial/social epithet. It doesn't help that the word also brings Andy Griffith to mind - not as the folksy sheriff of Mayberry, but as the downhome media demagogue Lonesome Rhodes from Elia Kazan's A Face in the Crowd (his screen debut, I think). The character Rhodes graduated from radio to television, hosting a variety show as a platform for his rightist political views long before the likes of Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. The name of the show was "Lonesome Rhodes' Cracker Barrel," and its underlying philosophy is neatly encapsuled by this quote by Rhodes:
This whole county…[is] just like my flock of sheep! Rednecks, crackers, hillbillies, hausfraus, shut-ins, pea-pickers - anybody who's gotta jump when somebody else blows the whistle…They're mine! I own 'em! They think like I do! Only they're more stupid than I am, so I gotta think for 'em!
Griffith turns in a tremendous performance in what is really a must-see film. But...we were talking about Cracker Barrel the restaurant, weren't we?
So, yeah, I have some mental associations with the word "cracker," and with the phrase "cracker barrel." Based on those alone - fairly or no - I'd be unlikely as a black man to eat at a restaurant called Cracker Barrel. Unfortunately, there's a history of allegations of racial discrimination toward customers to complicate one's view of this chain of eateries. Also, there evidence of sexual and racial discrimination in its workplace. And a discriminatory policy toward gay and lesbian employees. It's a rather unsavory stew for a family dining establishment, the kind of thing that make me wonder why any black person - or any person, period - would choose to eat there.
Well, the more things change, the more they stay the same. The latest patron to run afoul of the legendary Cracker Barrel "hospitality": Chris Rock's mother.
Oh, this is going to be a shame.
Civil Rights activist Al Sharpton and Rose Rock, the mother of comedian Chris Rock, will announce Wednesday their intention to file a lawsuit against the Cracker Barrel restaurant chain for refusing to serve black customers.The action stems from a May 2006 incident at a Murrells Inlet, S.C., Cracker Barrel restaurant. Rock said "she and her daughter were refused service," Rachel Noerdlinger, a spokesperson for Sharpton, told ABC News. Complaints to the restaurant management and to the South Carolina Human Affairs Commission were not acted on, Noerdlinger said.
Rock, Sharpton and members of Sharpton's National Action Network plan to announce their intention to fund a lawsuit in front of the Murrells Inlet Cracker Barrel where Rock alleges the incident took place, Noerdlinger told ABC News.
Cracker Barrel has messed with the wrong black lady this time. Oh, dear. Comedian Chris suddenly has new material that will last him all year.
Incidentally, Murrells Inlet is just a stone's throw from my home town of Georgetown, and from Chris Rock's home town of Andrews. I love downhome stories.
(Cross-posted.)
