What lesson did you learn at someone, or something, else's expense, to your enduring regret?
I remember catching the coolest little baby catfish while playing in the creek behind my house when I was about seven years old. I brought it home in a little container full of the muddy creek water, and thought I was doing it a great favor by transferring it into a clean glass bowl with some nice, clean tap water—where it promptly died.
Mama Shakes gently explained to me, while I sniffled and wiped away tears from my cheeks, that you can't just take a fish used to one type of water and put it another all sudden like that; you have to switch the water a little at a time, so it has a chance to adapt to its new environment.
I felt terrible about that little fish. I still do.
Question of the Day
More Support for the Position That Humankind Has Had Its Day and Now Just Needs to Go Away
I just need to say: I fucking hate the Fox game show "Moment of Truth" more than just about anything I've ever seen on network television.
I watched a few minutes of it once and wanted to vomit. I merely saw the adverts for the episode collapsed into a single minute below, and I was utterly fuming. In case you're unfamiliar with the concept, people are asked personal, embarrassing, and otherwise squirm-inducing questions which they must answer truthfully (determined by polygraph) in front of their closest friends and family to win money.
In this episode, the contestant was an EMT asked not only if he was repulsed by fat people, but also whether he'd ever "touched a female patient more than your job requires?" Ya know, because sexual assault is perfect game show fodder.
Gagginating. Truly.
Ugh
So, Nancy Pelosi apparently finally decided that it was time to speak about the sexism used against Hillary Clinton in the primaries. Wow, talk about timely.
This whole article is just really gobsmacking and depressing, so I'll just give you a few choice quotes.
Pelosi also said that she has been a victim of sexism, "all the time. But I just think it goes with the territory."There's more at the link, if you can stomach it. I'll just say that it's so nice for Pelosi that she had the "luxury" of completely ignoring the sexist attacks against Clinton during the primary until she was as, but hey, it all comes with the territory, right? It's a given. Get over it.
"I'll be very honest with you. I had the luxury as chair of the convention of not having to be involved (in the presidential primary)...My politics are about winning the House for the Democrats."
"Is there sexism? Probably so. Is it responsible for the defeat? I really wouldn't have the scientific knowledge, all of the information, to know that. But I do think that being a woman has a positive upside in the campaign, probably offset by more sexism, I don't know.
"Of course there is sexism. We all know that. But it's a given. It's a given. And I think with the next generation, it will be less...
" But I myself find that I get a tremendous upside because being a woman. And I don't spend a lot of time worrying about sexist remarks that people make. Important for our country, though, is to know our country...(it) might be valuable for those who study the American culture and politics.
Keiko Wakabayshi Will Kick Train Your Ass
I totally love this story: Martial arts expert Keiko Wakabayshi has been hired by the Italian military to train their recruits in hand-to-hand combat. Known as the "Samurai Granny," Wakabayshi is "a trained master in an array of martial arts disciplines including jujitsu, jojitso, kenjitso, judo, kendo and karate."
She also stands exactly five feet tall and is 77 years old.
She wipes the floor with soldiers of the Folgore brigade at their barracks in Livorno on a daily basis.Naturally, I'm annoyed that this story can't be told without the framing that the men are being toughened-up by the "humiliation" of being bested by woman, as opposed to just straightforwardly giving her credit for training them, but wev. This post isn't about that.
…She tells her students to look at her and believe that nothing is impossible. After flooring an opponent she tells them: "Don't think it's unbelievable. The physique doesn't matter."
Sparring is regarded as the most effective method of teaching martial arts and senior Italian military officers hope the experience of being humiliated by Miss Wakabayshi will toughen up their soldiers.
Miss Wakabayshi trained for many years to achieve her level of expertise and believes she can carry on defeating brawny soldiers for years to come.
This post is about celebrating Keiko Wakabayshi for being not only hugely inspirational but also just totally fookin' cool.
I mean, come on. How cool is she?!
Pacman Fever (Or, Imus is Still a Racist Asshole, Part II)
Following the furor over Imus' latest foray into the slimy cesspool of racist douche-baggery, the radio "personality" has apologized for his remarks. Oh, wait. No, he didn't. Imus now claims his abject lack of surprise at Pacman Adam Jones' high rate of arrest was merely pointed social commentary on racial profiling by police.
In fact, Imus is surprised anyone even questions this. "No man has more discussions about race than I have." Yeah, you're Cornel fucking West. But the indignation doesn't end there: "What people should be outraged about is that they arrest blacks for no reason, and I mean there's no reason to arrest this kid six times."
And, well… No. Jones should have been arrested six times, probably more. He's spat in a woman's face on more than one occasion. At a strip club, he allegedly grabbed a woman by the hair and smashed her head into the floor. He was tangentially involved in a shooting that left a man permanently disabled. He has a long string of arrests, all, as best I can tell, well deserved. In fact, it seems he's been treated very tamely by the law by virtue of being a pro athlete.
All of which makes Imus' explanation a steaming pile of horseshit. Because if you know anything about Jones, you know he's not "a lovely kid" who was just "out there having fun." He's a sociopathic goon who likes to assault women. So, Imus defending him is hollow and stupid and puts the lie to his claims of making some sort "sarcastic point."
Face it, Imus. You're a racist douche. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. Now, kindly shut the fuck up.
P.S. The article also states "Imus pointed out that his show has a black producer and two black co-hosts." Yes, you guessed it: some of Imus' best friends are black.
Um, No
So, after posting the email I received from my Senator, Dick Durbin this morning, I received an email from my other Senator. You may have heard of him. Let's just say I was slightly less excited by his response.Dear Paul:
So sorry to hear of his "disappointment." How awful for him.
Thank you for contacting me concerning the President’s domestic surveillance program. I appreciate hearing from you.
Providing any President with the flexibility necessary to fight terrorism without compromising our constitutional rights can be a delicate balance. I agree that technological advances and changes in the nature of the threat our nation faces may require that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), enacted in 1978, be updated to reflect the reality of the post 9/11 world. But that does not absolve the President of the responsibility to fully brief Congress on the new security challenge and to work cooperatively with Congress to address it.
As you know, Congress has been considering the issue of domestic surveillance since last year. Just before the August recess in 2007, Congress passed hastily crafted legislation to expand the authority of the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct surveillance of suspected foreign terrorists without a warrant or real oversight, even if the targets are communicating with someone in the United States. This legislation was signed into law by the President on August 5, 2007.
As you are aware, Congress has been working on reforms to FISA. On November 15, 2007, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3773, the “Responsible Electronic Surveillance That is Overseen, Reviewed, and Effective Act of 2007” (RESTORE Act) by a vote of 227-189. The House bill did not provide retroactive immunity for private companies that may have participated in the illegal collection of personal information, nor does it provide immunity for Administration officials who may have acted illegally.
On February 12, 2008, the Senate passed S. 2248, making its own reforms to FISA. During consideration of this bill, I was proud to cosponsor several amendments, including the Dodd-Feingold amendment to strike the immunity provision, which would have enhanced privacy protections while maintaining the tools to fight terrorism. However, with the defeat of this amendment, the bill did not provide for a mechanism that would allow the American people to learn exactly what the Bush Administration did with its warrantless wiretapping program and provided for no accountability.
The House and Senate worked out a compromise, reconciling differences between the two versions of the bill before it can be signed into law. While I recognize that this compromise is imperfect, I will support this legislation, which provides an important tool to fight the war on terrorism and provides for an Inspectors General report so that we can finally get to the bottom of the warrantless wiretapping program and how it undermined our civil liberties. However, I am disappointed that this bill, if signed into law, will grant an unprecedented level of immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated with the President's warrantless wiretapping program, and I will work with my colleagues to remove this provision.
The American people understand that new threats require flexible responses to keep them safe, and that our intelligence gathering capability needs to be improved. What they do not want is for the President or the Congress to use these imperatives as a pretext for promoting policies that not only go further than necessary to meet a real threat, but also violate some of the most basic tenets of our democracy. Like most members of Congress, I continue to believe that the essential objective of conducting effective domestic surveillance in the War on Terror can be achieved without discarding our constitutionally protected civil liberties.
Thank you again for writing. Please stay in touch as this debate continues.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
United States Senator
Click, buzz, click, buzz, click, buzz...
Out Of the Way, Little Lady... Let a Man Show You How It's Done
In my "Stealth Homos" post below, Astrea made a very good point in comments that all too often, women are portrayed as domestic chore experts when inside the home, but the moment the locale changes, a man can suddenly do the job better. Coincidentally, I had just finished ranting about a completely exasperating article that uses this very idea to Liss via email, and had begun writing a post to smear it with snark.
So, let's all share the love, shall we? What Moms Can Learn From Dads, sent straight to us from Mars and Venus via a female author (disappointingly). Here's just a few lovely bits that really pissed me off.When Andrew McDade's first daughter, Ana, was born nine years ago, he and his wife, Eliza, made a very modern decision: He would stay home to raise their kids. The reasons were partly financial — Andrew was a teacher and Eliza worked in finance — and "I'm more suited to it," he adds.
Yes, that completely modern decision that the father would stay home to raise the kids that's never occurred to anyone before this Brave New Millennium. Seriously, why is this always treated like a brand new, flabbergasting development?Indeed, McDade, who now lives in Ridgewood, N.J., took to fatherhood with gusto. But he soon realized there was another part of the job description: dealing with unsolicited maternal advice. Moms "would walk up to me and say, 'The baby's head is tilted!' " when he carted Anna around in the BabyBjörn. On the playground, they'd check whether he was doing OK. "It was funny," he says, "They thought, 'I know better.' "
Insert manly, "Oh, those meddling women" chuckle here, as if they're giving him advice because he's a dude, and not because he's a new parent. Now, I'm going to be indulgent and say that, just possibly, this guy was doing everything right and these "moms" were being a little intrusive. But you really have to love how this guy can't even consider the possibility that, you know, maybe they did know better. Maybe he was doing something wrong, or they had seen him making mistakes in the past and they thought he could use a little advice. (Couldn't everyone use a little advice when it comes to raising children?) But no, he's got it all under control! How the fuck could a woman know more than him? What a chore to have to deal with this unsolicited maternal advice; women never hear that kind of thing. Ahem.But these families are less rare than they once were. "I'm not the big exception anymore," McDade says. As men are taking on primary parenting roles, researchers are discovering that these dads do things a little differently — and sometimes a little better — than more traditional families.
Of course, it's the dads that are doing this "sometimes a little better" than "more traditional families," i.e., mothers. It's not the individual parent. It's all about the gender differences, yet again. Cheese and crackers.While moms thought they had a lot to teach McDade, primary parent dads have four main lessons they're teaching moms, too:
So, McDade is somehow representative of all men now? And you're going to love these "four main lessons."1. It's OK to keep a hand in the workforce. Though the number has risen about 50% in the past three years, there are still only about 150,000 "pure" stay-at-home dads such as McDade around the USA. But 2002 Census figures show dads are the primary parent in about 20% of families with young kids and working moms.
Well gee, maybe they "feel a lot less anxiety" because they haven't been traditionally shamed for having the temerity to have children and continue working. Maybe because they haven't traditionally had to worry about having children or losing their job. But, you know, thanks for giving women the permission to do both. Christ.
[...]
Men like Smith understand there is a middle ground. "We don't really have a good word for combining primary caregiving and worker roles," he says. Many men and women do both. But men he interviewed "feel a lot less anxiety" about maintaining a professional identity. 2. You don't have to do the laundry. Moms who stay home with children often assume they must cook, clean and run errands as well. Married, non-employed moms of young kids spend 1.61 hours a day on housework and 1.41 hours on food prep and clean-up. Some dads excel in these areas. But statistically, married non-employed dads of young kids spend just 0.42 hours a day on housework and 0.64 hours on food chores. Clearly, with men, domestic work and child care are being negotiated as separate jobs.
Well, sure, you don't have to do the laundry, but most women are expected to do the laundry, as well as "rock the cradle," do the rest of the housework, and have a decent meal on the table when I get home from work, for chrissakes. Women have always been strictly held to the expectation of completing domestic chores, because "she's at home all day anyway," but now that a man is involved, now domestic work and child care are "negotiable." Hey, I took the kid to the park, why the fuck should I have to sort whites and darks?
"When you think about it, the task of caring for kids is logically different from doing the housework," says Joan C. Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at Hastings College of the Law in California. There's no reason that the person who rocks the cradle also needs to pick up the dry cleaning.3. Parents are people, too. So what do dads do with the time they're not dusting? "They give themselves more permission to have leisure time — to watch ball games or go out," says Bill Doherty, a professor of Family Social Science at the University of Minnesota. He counsels families and finds that "men tend to have almost no ambivalence" about this.
Allow me to change that first sentence. MALE parents are people, too. Of course they have almost no ambivalence about leisure time; they're not traditionally held to sexist standards where they're expected to (and/or guilted into) give all of their time to home, child and spouse, where the ultimate in luxury and "me time" is a bubble bath. But hey mothers, if you're not getting enough leisure time because you're running to soccer practice, taking the kids to school, going to the grocery store, paying bills, taking the kids to the doctor's office, doing housework, making lunches, going to PTA meetings, cooking meals, or any of the other things you're expected to do all day, it's because you haven't given yourself permission to do so. Get up off your ass. No, McDade- it's not about giving yourself permission, it's about having a partner that "gives you permission."4. Kids need both parents. In traditional families, dads tend to delegate most child-related decisions to mom. But women, even when they are breadwinners, are "not willing to outsource their children's childhoods, even to their husbands," says Williams. While Smith was the primary parent, his wife worked about 35 hours a week (rather than 70), and took care of their son every morning.
Yes, you greedy, grasping mothers are unwilling to let your husbands do anything when it comes to raising children. You're smothering them! You want them to grow up homo or something?
It's really ridiculous and infuriating how these four "lessons" are directed at primary parent mothers, rather than at working fathers. Of course you have to do the laundry if you don't have someone else to do it for you. It's written as though mothers have never considered that they'd prefer to have someone else to do the housework occasionally and have a little time for themselves.
Oh, and single parents? Same-sex parents? You don't fucking count."My daughters don't see the world as mommy stays home and daddy goes to work," McDade says. "They don't use the conventional logic." Plus, they have no cavities and "no big facial scars," he jokes.
So, as long as a father can keep his children from getting maimed, he's doing a good job. That's quite the standard you've set for yourself there, McDade.
He must be doing something right.
So, relax, ladies! Kick back! You take this parenting thing so fucking seriously! Oh, and could you shut those kids up? I'm trying to watch T.V., here.
Concern Troll of the Day
Richard Cohen at the Washington Post earns the award as today's Concern Troll:
In some recent magazine articles, I and certain of my colleagues have been accused of being soft on McCain, forgiving him his flips, his flops and his mostly conservative ideology. I do not plead guilty to this charge, because, over the years, the man's imperfections have not escaped my keen eye. But, for the record, let's recapitulate: McCain has either reversed himself or significantly amended his positions on immigration, tax cuts for the wealthy, campaign spending (as it applies to use of his wife's corporate airplane) and, most recently, offshore drilling. In the more distant past, he has denounced then embraced certain ministers of medieval views and changed his mind about the Confederate flag, which flies by state sanction in South Carolina only, I suspect, to provide Republican candidates with a chance to choose tradition over common decency. There, I've said it all.What he's saying is that it's okay for John McCain to flip-flop on his positions because we know that when he does it, it's because he spent all those years as a POW and therefore when he changes his position, it's for a damn good reason. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that he's now trying to suck up to the base of the party he could ignore when his political future didn't hang in the balance. The POW reference makes Mr. McCain invulnerable to attack because to question that experience is to question his patriotism, and to hint that the press might be giving McCain a free ride because of it... well, we can't have that, can we?
But here is the difference between McCain and Obama -- and Obama had better pay attention. McCain is a known commodity. It's not just that he's been around a long time and staked out positions antithetical to those of his Republican base. It's also -- and more important -- that we know his bottom line. As his North Vietnamese captors found out, there is only so far he will go, and then his pride or his sense of honor takes over. This -- not just his candor and nonstop verbosity on the Straight Talk Express -- is what commends him to so many journalists.
Obama might have a similar bottom line, core principles for which, in some sense, he is willing to die. If so, we don't know what they are. Nothing so far in his life approaches McCain's decision to refuse repatriation as a POW so as to deny his jailors a propaganda coup. In fact, there is scant evidence the Illinois senator takes positions that challenge his base or otherwise threaten him politically. That's why his reversal on campaign financing and his transparently false justification of it matter more than similar acts by McCain.
What's really ironic is that the more they exploit Mr. McCain's time in North Vietnam as a POW, the cheaper and less meaningful it becomes.
(Cross-posted.)
Go, Cubs, Go!
This past weekend was round one of the annual Crosstown Classic in Chicago, when the Cubs (North side) and White Sox (South side) meet for two three-game series in a massive battle for serious bragging rights. Going into this year's Crosstown Classic, both teams were leading their divisions, making it a particularly vicious meeting. The first round was at Wrigley, giving the Cubs a home-field advantage—which they exploited as handily as they did the usual managerial errors one can expect from the Sox.
The Cubs took all three games in the end, with one of the most spectacular innings of baseball I've ever seen during Game Two—a nine run inning that started 4-1 Sox, in which Jim Edmonds and Mike Fontenot homered on consecutive pitches from Jose Contreras (4-3), Ryan Theriot walked, Jason Marquis singled, Kosuke Fukudome, Eric Patterson, and Derrek Lee all nailed RBI singles (6-4 Cubs), Aramis Ramiriez blew a three-run homer to left (9-4), and, after a pitching change, Edmonds came up to bat and grabbed a line-drive homer to left off of Sox reliever Boone Logan before the inning ended 10-4 Cubs.
But this post isn't really about baseball.
The truth is, while I'm a Cubs fan because I love their underdoggity goodness and because I adore Wrigley Field and because I was a resident North-sider for a decade, I grew up in NW Indiana where most everyone—including my dad—is a Sox fan, and I don't really have any genuine animosity for the Sox, even though I was rooting against them Big Time in the Crosstown Classic, and there was a "Hey, how'd ya like that inning?" phone call delivered to Papa Shakes after the nine-run fabulon. ("I'm not livid, but I'm not happy," he told Iain, who placed the call.)
But I do have genuine animosity for Sox Manager Ozzie Guillén.
Ozzie, besides being a bad manager (although not a terrible one) and a jerk who trashtalks his former (and sometimes current) players and orders his pitchers to hit batters (and laments that they ignore him), is a homophobe and a sexist. Every time I see him interviewed, every time he opens his mouth, something homophobic and/or misogynistic comes out of it—this player's a bitch, that player's not a real man, the Sox are treated like bitches by the media, etc. etc. etc. I positively loathe the guy, because he is just the absolute antithesis of a good sportsperson.
So I can't even tell you how much I loved watching the Cubs trounce the Sox last weekend—because they kept cutting to the Blizzard of Oz in the dugout, with a face like absolute thunder.
And the more miserable he looked, the happier I felt.
"Suck it, homophobe!" I yelled at the TV, and gave Ozzie the double-barreled bird, while Iain laughed uproariously at my antics, every time another shot of Ozzie appeared on the screen. "Your blow-up dolls will bring you cold comfort while you're crying yourself to sleep tonight, loser!"
I'm not of the "winning isn't everything; it's the only thing" school of thought when it comes to sports. I can enjoy a game (if admittedly less so) even when the Cubbies lose.
But winning against Ozzie? That's something special. That's magic.
The thing about Ozzie is that he's impervious to teaspoons. He just doesn't have the slightest interest in not offending people, or the slightest concern that he does. Even when it's been explained to him that he's wrong, that he's been hurtful, even when he's forced to apologize, he'll inevitably later say that he didn't think he should have had to, and didn't see what all the fuss was about. Real men, he explains, don't apologize.
Teaspoons haven't worked. So bats will have to do.
Dear Maude, I hope we kick his ass at Comiskey.
Stealth Homos!!
I want you all to see the completely evil, corrupting to teh chyldrenz, sex-infused stealth homo commercial the Evil Homosexual Agenda(tm) is currently using to indoctrinate children into their evil ways. And their evil sandwich-making.
It's just sinister, right? Well, of course, as you've probably figured out, people went apeshit and Heinz pulled the ad:
Heinz has withdrawn its Deli Mayo TV ad that featured two men sharing a kiss and apologised to viewers after the advertising regulator received about 200 complaints that it was offensive and inappropriate.Of course, the humor of the whole ad completely flew over their heads, but I suppose I'm stupid for assuming homophobes might have a sense of humor*. And for the record, I find it completely fucking offensive that you think a kiss between two men is "inappropriate to see." Mmmkay?
The Heinz Deli Mayo ad has been pulled after less than a week on air after viewers complained to the Advertising Standards Authority that it was "offensive" and "inappropriate to see two men kissing".
Other complaints include that the ad was "unsuitable to be seen by children" and that it raised the difficult problem of parents having to discuss the issue of same-sex relationships with younger viewers.Yes, it's our good friend "won't someone please think of the children." Welcome to the one-trick pony circus. And Jebus forbid that you have to explain a concept to your child that might be difficult. Horror of horrors! You mean parenting involves work? Frankly folks, the only people that might have difficulty explaining the concept of a same-sex relationship are people that hate same-sex relationships. It's so hard to convey bigotry and hatred to a five-year-old, you know? While still pretending to be a good parent, I mean. Whatever will I do?
"It is our policy to listen to consumers. We recognise that some consumers raised concerns over the content of the ad and this prompted our decision to withdraw it," said Nigel Dickie, director of corporate affairs for Heinz UK.Yeah, all two hundred of them. Of course, the thousands that didn't complain or even enjoyed the ad are not important. Not that this matters anyway, because:
The Heinz TV ad carried an "ex-kids" restriction, meaning it cannot be shown in or around children's programming, because Heinz Deli Mayo falls foul of Ofcom's TV ad restrictions relating to products that are high in fat, salt and sugar.So these hysterical homophobes had nothing to worry about, the "what about the children" bullshit was so much smoke and mirrors, but the ad got pulled anyway. For a quick peck that hardly qualifies as passionate or even sexy.
As Deeky said in an email to Liss and I over this story: "Corporations just need to say "fuck you, if you don't like our ad, don't buy our fuckin' mustard!"
Fucking right.
(Transcript of the ad, from the article:)
Heinz's ad opens with a family on a normal morning routine with a young boy and girl getting ready for school and their father preparing for the office.(*For the record, I've seen that some supportive folks aren't 100% pleased with the ad either, due to the "mother" being identified as such. I.E., one of the men in a gay male relationship has to be "the woman." I can see their point, but I don't think this ad is actually trying to show a "gay relationship." My opinion, YMMV.)
The young boy and girl go to the kitchen to get their sandwiches, which are being prepared by a man with a New York accent, dressed in a deli serving outfit, who they refer to as "mum".
When their father goes to get his sandwich he says to mum in the kitchen: "See you tonight love."
However, mum barks back "Hey, ain't you forgetting something?", at which point the two men share a kiss. Mum then sends the father off with the words: "Love you. Straight home from work, sweet cheeks."
Lurve You, Mean It
Yeah, so, yesterday started out bad and got worse from there. I was all set to just call it a day and start drinking rum at 10AM, when I received an email that really improved my mood. It was from my Senator, Dick Durbin, otherwise known as "The Other Senator from Illinois... Wait, There Are Two?" I thought you'd all like to share in the cheer (and no, "Spud" wasn't in the original email):Dear Mr. Spud:
Sorry, just jumping in here to say that I lurve that Durbin actually says this.
Thank you for your message regarding the surveillance of American citizens by the National Security Agency (NSA). I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue and share your concerns.
Protecting both the security and the freedom of the American people is among my highest priorities. We must ensure that the federal government defends the people of the United States from external threats while preserving the civil liberties that have helped make the United States the greatest and most enduring democracy in the world.
President Bush authorized the NSA to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance of communications made by American citizens living within the United States. At the time of the President's authorization, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) required the government to seek a warrant from a special court in order to conduct electronic surveillance of communications between American citizens and anyone outside the country. The NSA did not obtain approval from the FISA court or from any other court before initiating its domestic surveillance program.
No "compromise," no "promises," no playing into "keeping America safe" paranoia. Sigh. Swoon. Anyone have a cigarette?
For most of its existence, the NSA's program has operated without meaningful oversight. Few members of Congress were briefed about the program until its existence was revealed by the media, and those members who were aware were sworn to secrecy. The majority of the members of Congress still have not been fully briefed about the program's operational details. The Administration also has shut down its own Justice Department investigation into the NSA's program. In essence, the Administration has attempted to operate this program without any supervision or oversight. The lack of a mechanism for correcting potential abuses in the program undermines our Constitutional system of checks and balances and raises serious concerns about the possibility of excessive intrusion.
Congress has tried to work with Administration officials to update FISA in light of technological advances in communications. Too often, however, the Administration has taken advantage of the program's secrecy in its negotiations with Congress. In August 2007, the Administration proposed amending FISA through legislation known as the Protect America Act. I voted against the measure because I believed the bill provided too much opportunity for abuse by the NSA and other intelligence officials. Nonetheless, Congress passed the bill and the President signed it into law.
Congress currently is engaged in a debate about the appropriate scope of FISA. At the center of this debate is the issue of whether telecommunications companies that assisted in illegal surveillance should receive retroactive immunity from prosecution.
I oppose retroactive immunity for these companies and supported an amendment to the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (S. 2248) that would have prevented them from obtaining retroactive immunity. This amendment, however, was unsuccessful. After the amendment failed, I voted against the bill, but it passed by a vote of 68-29.
The House of Representatives has refused to support any similar bill containing a retroactive immunity provision, and negotiations on this matter are continuing. Any legislation amending FISA should hold telecommunications companies responsible for their unlawful actions. The legislation should bring to light the role telecommunications companies played in the Administration's unlawful attempts to listen in on the communications of American citizens.
When the President and his Administration order surveillance of American citizens, these actions must be conducted in a manner consistent with the rule of law and the Constitution's commitment to civil liberties. I am deeply concerned about the manner in which the Executive Branch has initiated and conducted the NSA surveillance programs. I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress continues to debate this issue.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch.
Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator
I'm wishing more and more these days that my other Senator was running for President.
UNITY!!!!!!eleventy-one!!!
Hillary Clinton, in her continuing quest to totally destroy the Democratic Party, will join Barack Obama on the campaign trail this Friday in New Hampshire as he courts female voters:
The Obama-Clinton event will take place in the town of Unity, in the southwest corner of a swing state that Obama hopes to carry in November. The symbolism goes beyond the town's name, as Clinton and Obama each won 107 votes there in the January primary.According to my Top Secret SourcesTM, Obama and Clinton will ride into the town of Unity on matching his-n-hers Unity Ponies, waving yin-and-yang flags while singing "Ebony and Ivory."
And if that doesn't unite the party, I just don't know what will.
Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime
I have no memory whatsoever of this awful-looking game show from the '80s, which I can say with some certainty is a good thing, as I almost can't imagine a worse thing for a little girl to watch! The "end game" of this show is positively shocking, lol.
Oy.
Quote of the Day
"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology... He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter." — James Dobson, douchebag extraordinaire, responding to "recent comments" by presidential hopeful Barrack Obama.
Irony, thy name is Dobson.
This Just In: Imus is Still a Racist Asshole
Despite Don Imus' heartfelt reassurances that his return to the airwaves would be accompanied by a newfound respect for people of color and women and blah blah blah he totally swears he's not a racist douchebag, honest, and promises it was just a crazy slip that he called the Rutgers women's basketball team a bunch of nappy-headed hos, it turns out that he might actually be a racist, sexist buttfor with shit for brains after all.
Huh.
Anyhoo, this morning, discussing with sports announcer Warner Wolf the attempts by professional football player Adam "Pacman" Jones' to rehabilitate his image, Imus suddenly asked: "What color is he?"
Warner Wolf: Oh, defensive back Adam "Pacman" Jones, recently signed by the Cowboys—here's a guy suspended all of 2007, following the shooting at a Vegas nightclub—You can listen to audio of the exchange here.
Don Imus: Well, stuff happens. You're at a nightclub, for god's sake. Whaddaya think's gonna happen at a nightclub? People are drinking and doing drugs—
Wolf: Yeah.
Imus: —there're women there, and people have guns—
Wolf: Yeah.
Imus: —so there…go ahead.
Wolf: Well, also he's been arrested six times since being drafted by Tennessee in 2005—
Imus: What color is he?
Wolf: He's African-American.
Imus: Oh, well, there you go. Now we know.
Imus claims he was simply misunderstood: "I meant that he was being picked on because he's black." Uh-huh. And that's so totally exactly completely what it sounds like he means when you listen to it. It totally doesn't at all not a bit not in the slightest sound like he means to imply that's just what you'd expect from a black man. It definitely positively certainly sounds like he means that's just what you'd expect from the institutionally racist American legal system.
In case I'm not laying it on thick enough to be noticeable, that was sarcasm.
And I'd love to know what the fuck planet he's on that the presence of women at a nightclub means that a shooting is inevitable. Even as a "joke" that doesn't make sense; and no doubt he'd say it was just a joke.
Which certainly makes suspect his claim that the comment immediately following was some kind of searing social commentary on Jones' race making him unfairly targeted by the long arm of the law.
Of course, anyone who doesn't see that for the patent bullshit it is on its face is probably too stubborn and hopeless to be convinced anyhow.
[H/T to Papa Shakes.]
Question of the Day
Suggested by Shaker RedEmma: "I moved to Seattle about 2 years ago. I was prepared for the steep hills. I knew it would be overcast and rainy a lot in the winter. But what I wasn't ready for was that in the summertime, it stays light until 9:30 or even 10:00 at night. You can go into a 7-something movie, and when you come out, it will still be full daylight outside. It still surprises me.
"So, my suggestion for a Question of the Day is: When you've moved to or visited a place that you haven't lived (or been to) before, what was something that you weren't prepared for? What surprised you the most? What's the thing that no one told you about?"
I'm reminded of coming back to the US after living in Scotland for awhile, and noticing how much higher the sky seems in the US. It's such a weird phenomenon; I mentioned it to Iain and he totally understood what I meant. It's evidently an illusion created by the island climate, and the small size of the island itself, in Britain.
Caption This Photo
The backdrop made McCain's flubbed greeting, "Hellooooooo, Mechanic Club of Greenland!" all the more embarrassing.
Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. addresses the Economic Club of Canada, Friday, June 20, 2008, in Ottawa, Canada. (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Fred Chartrand)
Quote of the Day
"Certainly it would be a big advantage to him."—Charlie Black, one of John McCain's "most trusted political advisers," on how another terrorist attack on American soil might affect McCain's presidential ambitions.
McCain disavowed the comment, and Black has since apologized.
Teach Your Children Well
WTF is all I have to say about this.
No, wait, that isn't all I have to say. But seriously, WTF? What kind of parent sends their daughter to a camp where one of the activities is "putting together and accessorizing outfits"? It's really more than that say defenders (though I call bullshit on that):
"Overall it has a fashion background, but it also has to do with personal development and self-confidence," said Jo Ross, camp coordinator and leader.Sure, because a woman's self-worth should always be tied to how "fashionable" her attire. That's healthy. Oh, yes, and girls as young as six are encouraged to attend. Get em neurotic and worried about self-image early, I guess.
At fashion stops, like Limited Too, Old Navy and Designer Shoe Warehouse, campers not only learn fashion terminology but public speaking skills, as they are asked to stand up in front of the group and explain their favorite pieces, Ross said.Because, really, that's what should be valuable in a young woman's life: discussing her outfits.
And here's my favorite bit:
"This is something different," Ross said. "Not everybody can be a cheerleader or football player, so this is something for someone with different interests ... the most important thing I tell the girls is to have fun."Oh, okay. Sure, not everyone can be a cheerleader, or an athlete, but anyone can learn to be shallow! Too bad there aren't any other choices for women to aspire to these days.
(H/T to Lisa at Parents for Ethical Marketing.)
Yes, Please
I just read that James McAvoy is rumored to have been cast as Bilbo Baggins in the upcoming Peter Jackson-produced, Guillermo del Toro-directed live action film of J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit.
Wantity want want!!! And I can't wait to see Wanted this weekend, either. I mean, come on.
Yowza.
